IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0221817.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Loss of control as a violation of expectations: Testing the predictions of a common inconsistency compensation approach in an inclusionary cyberball game

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Niedeggen
  • Rudolf Kerschreiter
  • Katharina Schuck

Abstract

Personal control relies on the expectation that events are contingent upon one’s own behavior. A common ‘inconsistency compensation approach’ posits that a violation of expectancies in social interaction triggers aversive arousal and compensatory effort. Following this approach, we tested the hypothesis that interventions affecting participants' decisions violate the expected personal control. In a modified version of the established cyberball paradigm, participants were not excluded, but consistently included. However, their decisions regarding the recipient of a ball throw in the virtual game were occasionally overruled (expectancy violation). We hypothesized that this intervention will trigger a P3 response in event-related brain potentials (ERP). Since this component is related to subjective expectancies, its amplitude was assumed to depend on the frequency of interventions (independent factor: loss of control). Further, we manipulated the vertical position of the participants’ avatar on the computer screen (independent factor: verticality). Building on research showing that verticality is related to the self-assigned power and influences the expected level of control, we hypothesized that the ERP effects of intervention should be more pronounced for participants with avatars in superior position. As predicted, both experimental factors interactively affected the expression of the ERP response: In case of low intervention frequency, P3 amplitudes were significantly pronounced if the participants’ avatar was positioned above as compared to below co-players (high > low self-assigned power). The effect of verticality could be traced back to a lack of adaptation of P3 amplitudes to recurring aversive events. By demonstrating that loss of control triggers ERP effects corresponding to those triggered by social exclusion, this study provides further evidence for a common cognitive mechanism in reactions to aversive events based on an inconsistency in expectancy states.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Niedeggen & Rudolf Kerschreiter & Katharina Schuck, 2019. "Loss of control as a violation of expectations: Testing the predictions of a common inconsistency compensation approach in an inclusionary cyberball game," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-20, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221817
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221817
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221817
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0221817&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0221817?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chris H J Hartgerink & Ilja van Beest & Jelte M Wicherts & Kipling D Williams, 2015. "The Ordinal Effects of Ostracism: A Meta-Analysis of 120 Cyberball Studies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-24, May.
    2. Michael Muthukrishna & Joseph Henrich, 2019. "A problem in theory," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(3), pages 221-229, March.
    3. David Dubois & Ena Inesi & Simona Botti & Derek D. Rucker & Adam D. Galinsky, 2011. "Power and Choice: Their Dynamic Interplay in Quenching the Thirst for Personal Control," Post-Print hal-00696608, HAL.
    4. Narayanan, Jayanth & Tai, Kenneth & Kinias, Zoe, 2013. "Power motivates interpersonal connection following social exclusion," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 257-265.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yina Mao & Yan Liu & Chunyan Jiang & Iris D. Zhang, 2018. "Why am I ostracized and how would I react? — A review of workplace ostracism research," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 745-767, September.
    2. Wu, Chia-Huei & Liu, Jun & Kwong Kwan, Ho & Lee, Cynthia, 2016. "Why and when workplace ostracism inhibits organizational citizenship behaviors: an organizational identification perspective," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64006, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Hwang, YooHee & Shin, Joongwon & Mattila, Anna S., 2018. "So private, yet so public: The impact of spatial distance, other diners, and power on solo dining experiences," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 36-47.
    4. Waytz, Adam & Chou, Eileen Y. & Magee, Joe C. & Galinsky, Adam D., 2015. "Not so lonely at the top: The relationship between power and loneliness," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 69-78.
    5. Annika Scholl & Florian Landkammer & Kai Sassenberg, 2019. "When those who know do share: Group goals facilitate information sharing, but social power does not undermine it," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, March.
    6. Joep Cornelissen & Mariëtte Kaandorp, 2023. "Towards Stronger Causal Claims in Management Research: Causal Triangulation Instead of Causal Identification," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 834-860, June.
    7. Adam Maxwell Sparks & Daniel M T Fessler & Colin Holbrook, 2019. "Elevation, an emotion for prosocial contagion, is experienced more strongly by those with greater expectations of the cooperativeness of others," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-29, December.
    8. Ma, Anyi & Yang, Yu & Savani, Krishna, 2019. "“Take it or leave it!” A choice mindset leads to greater persistence and better outcomes in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-12.
    9. Brady, Garrett L. & Inesi, M. Ena & Mussweiler, Thomas, 2021. "The power of lost alternatives in negotiations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 59-80.
    10. Yu, Andrew & Hays, Nicholas A. & Zhao, Emma Y., 2019. "Development of a bipartite measure of social hierarchy: The perceived power and perceived status scales," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 84-104.
    11. Lu, Zhi & Bolton, Lisa E. & Ng, Sharon & Chen, Haipeng (Allan), 2020. "The Price of Power: How Firm’s Market Power Affects Perceived Fairness of Price Increases," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 220-234.
    12. Sunyee Yoon & Hyeongmin Christian Kim & Vicki MorwitzEditor & Simona BottiAssociate Editor, 2018. "Feeling Economically Stuck: The Effect of Perceived Economic Mobility and Socioeconomic Status on Variety Seeking," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 44(5), pages 1141-1156.
    13. Maryum Tanveer & Meiraj Hassan & Zoya Ali Shah & Shuja Ul Islam, 2020. "Clash of Generations: Assessing the Impact of Generational Diversity in a Workforce," International Journal of Business and Economic Affairs (IJBEA), Sana N. Maswadeh, vol. 5(4), pages 184-198.
    14. Semken, Christoph & Rossell, David, 2020. "Bayesian Specification Curve Analysis," OSF Preprints cahyq, Center for Open Science.
    15. Calder, Bobby J. & He, Sharlene & Sternthal, Brian, 2023. "Using theoretical frameworks in behavioral research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    16. Jesus Datu & Jose Reyes, 2015. "The Dark Side of Possessing Power: Power Reduces Happiness in a Collectivist Context," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 124(3), pages 981-991, December.
    17. Wu, Linwan, 2019. "Website interactivity may compensate for consumers’ reduced control in E-Commerce," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 253-266.
    18. Hallgeir Sjåstad, 2019. "Short-sighted greed? Focusing on the future promotes reputation-based generosity," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(2), pages 199-213, March.
    19. Preeti Narwal & J. K. Nayak & Shivam Rai, 2022. "Assessing Customers' Moral Disengagement from Reciprocity Concerns in Participative Pricing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(2), pages 537-554, June.
    20. Juana Castro & Stefan Drews & Filippos Exadaktylos & Joël Foramitti & Franziska Klein & Théo Konc & Ivan Savin & Jeroen van den Bergh, 2020. "A review of agent‐based modeling of climate‐energy policy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0221817. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.