Exclusion and micro-rejection: event-related potential response predicts mitigated distress

Abstract

We studied time-based neural activity with event-related potentials (ERPs) in young adults during a computer-simulated ball-toss game. Experiencing fair play initially, participants were ultimately excluded by other players. Dense-array ERPs showed time-dependent associations between slow-wave activity (580–900 ms) in left prefrontal/medial frontal cortical regions for exclusion events and self-reported distress. More subtle ‘micro-rejections’ during fair play showed a similar distress to ERP association (420–580 ms). In both cases, greater positive amplitude neural activity was associated with less post-exclusion distress. Findings suggest that rapidly occurring neural responses to social exclusion events are linked to individual differences in ostracism-related distress. Relations emerged even during fair play, providing a window into the neural basis of more subtle social-cognitive perceptual processes.

Social exclusion modulates event-related frontal theta and tracks ostracism distress in children

“…Immediately after the game, children completed the Need Threat Scale, a reliable and valid 21-item ostracism distress measure which has been related to ERPs in this dataset (Crowley et al, 2010) and other studies (Crowley et al, 2009; White et al, 2012). In addition, rejection distress has been linked to fMRI BOLD signals in regions of the medial frontal cortex (Eisenberger et al, 2003; Gunther-Moor et al, 2012; Masten et al, 2009; Rotge et al, 2015).…”

“…In humans, the potency of the experience is so strong that it triggers distress even when the excluders are fictitious (Crowley et al, 2009; Zadro et al, 2004) or from despised outgroups (Gonsalkorale and Williams, 2007). In real world situations, social exclusion negatively impacts physical and mental health (Cohen and Janicki-Deverts, 2009; Holt-Lunstad et al, 2010), reflected in lower levels of self-esteem (Deater-Deckard, 2001) and poorer academic self-confidence (Buhs, 2005), as well as higher levels of aggression, depression, and anxiety (Ladd, 2006).…”

“…Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalogram (EEG) measures both show that various frontal responses are related to measures of distress, ostracism, mood, and attachment (Crowley et al, 2009; Crowley et al, 2010; Eisenberger et al, 2003; Masten et al, 2009; McPartland et al, 2011; Sreekrishnan et al, 2014; White et al, 2013; White et al, 2012). fMRI studies have identified a number of frontal regions engaged during social exclusion including the dorsal and ventral ACC, medial prefrontal cortex, ventro-lateral prefrontal cortex (Gunther-Moor et al, 2012), subgenual ACC (Masten et al, 2009; Masten et al, 2011), and right ventral prefrontal cortex (Eisenberger et al, 2003).…”

“…For example, rejection events have been shown to engage distinct slow-wave ERP activity at left/medial frontal sites, which is correlated with self-reported distress in adults (Crowley et al, 2009). Similarly, Crowley et al (2010) found that in middle-childhood, children scoring higher in ostracism distress elicited larger (i.e., more negative) slow wave ERPs at medial frontal sites following rejection events in the Cyberball task.…”

The Application of Electroencephalography to Investigate the Neural Bases of Parenting: A Review

“…These experimental paradigms provide an important first step in understanding the basic neural response to these salient infant stimuli, but more dynamic ERP paradigms will be a valuable addition. For instance, a number of studies in adults and children have examined the neural correlates of social exclusion using a virtual ball-toss paradigm where participants are both included and excluded by fictional players (Crowley et al, 2009; Crowley, Wu, Molfese, & Mayes, 2010; Williams, Cheung, & Choi, 2000; Williams & Jarvis, 2006). Building on this work, one study reported that the level of dismissing attachment in an early adolescent sample was associated with the ERP response to social exclusion by unfamiliar peers (White et al, 2012).…”