A Socio-Ecological Approach to Cross-Cultural Differences in the Sensitivity to Social Rejection

Abstract

The authors propose that cross-cultural differences in sensitivity to social rejection, or the extent to which one is alert to potential rejection from significant others, can be understood as an adaptation to different social ecological contexts varying in the degrees of relational mobility. In societies low in relational mobility, such as East Asia, relationships and group memberships are stable and exclusive, and thus it is difficult for individuals to recover once rejected from current relationships or groups. In these contexts, one would expect people to be continuously paying attention to negative feedback from others to avoid potential rejection. In contrast, this type of anxiety will be less pronounced in societies high in relational mobility, such as North America, because there are a greater number of relationship alternatives available, even if individuals were to be excluded from a particular relationship. Results from two cross-national studies showed that, as expected, individuals' perceptions of relational mobility partially mediated rejection sensitivity (Study 1) and Taijin Kyofusho, an allocentric subtype of social anxiety (Study 2).

Low relational mobility leads to greater motivation to understand enemies but not friends and acquaintances

“…The current research brings some implications in relational mobility. Evidence supporting the significant influence of relational mobility on interpersonal relationships has been accumulating (Li et al, 2015Lou & Li, 2017;Sato et al, 2014;Schug et al, 2009Schug et al, , 2010Yamada et al, 2015). However, enemyship has not been extensively examined from the perspective of relational mobility.…”

“…For instance, high mobility (vs. low mobility) would promote larger friendship networks (Lun, Roth, Oishi, & Kesebir, 2012), fewer cautions about friendship and less concern about existences of enemies (Li, Adams, Kurtis, & Hamamura, 2015). Mobility also extensively shapes people's strategies used in different types of social relationships (e.g., Li, Hamamura, & Adams, 2016;Lou & Li, 2017;Sato, Yuki, & Norasakkunkit, 2014). For instance, self-disclosure in friendship (Schug, Yuki, & Maddux, 2010) and intimacy seeking in both friendship and romantic relationships (Yamada, Kito, & Yuki, 2015) are more likely to be adopted as a commitment device to strengthen relationships in high-relational-mobility societies.…”

A socio-ecological approach to national differences in online privacy concern: The role of relational mobility and trust

“…On the other hand, low relational mobility environments are characterized by relative difficulty in forming and dissolving relationships, and there is a relative lack of opportunities for meeting new people; relationships are thus generally determined by circumstance, tend to be long standing, and be characterized by strong obligatory ties. Previous research found relational mobility to be high in North American societies, such as the United States, whereas East Asian societies, such as Japan, are low in relational mobility (Falk, Heine, Yuki, & Takemura, 2009;Schug, Yuki, Horikawa, & Takemura, 2009;Sznycer et al, 2012;Wang & Leung, 2010;Yuki et al, 2007).…”

Mindfulness skills in individuals with borderline personality features: Roles of impulsivity and rejection sensitivity

“…While most of the research reviewed here examined individualistic cultures (Peters, Eisenlohr-Moul & Smart, 2015;Velotti, Garofalo & Bizzi, 2015;Wupperman, 2006), the current study sampled a collectivist culture. In collectivist environments, relational mobility is low, which makes every relationship more valuable due to their highly stable nature (Sato, Yuki & Norasakkunkit, 2014). Accordingly, if an individual is rejected in one relationship, it is harder to become involved in a new relationship.…”

“…Therefore, independently of personality characteristics, individuals pay a lot of attention to others' negative feedback with perceived rejection being a source of high anxiety. Thus, because individuals living in a collectivist culture may be more alert to rejection than individuals living in individualistic cultures (Garris, Ohbuchi, Oikawa & Harris, 2010;Sato, Yuki & Norasakkunkit, 2014), higher mindfulness skill levels may not be enough to reduce rejection sensitivity levels in these individuals.…”