Why do(n’t) you like me? The role of social approach and avoidance motives in attributions following social acceptance and rejection
- 655 Downloads
The present research aimed at answering the question why people differ in their way of attributing experienced social acceptance and rejection. Using a motivational approach, two scenario studies (Study 1, N = 280; Study 2, N = 232) and one study using actual social interactions (Study 3, N = 128) supported the hypothesis that dispositional social approach motives are associated with attributions following social acceptance (β = .16–.23, p < .001) but not social rejection (β = −.03 to −.06, p > .13), whereas dispositional social avoidance motives are associated with attributions following social rejection (β = .23–.29, p < .001) but not social acceptance (β = −.02 to −.08, p > .07). These studies demonstrate that social approach and avoidance motives are differentially predictive in social situations with positive compared to negative outcomes. Moreover, social motives play an important role in people’s attributions following their experiences of social acceptance or rejection. Taken together, the three studies suggest that people’s explanations of social acceptance and rejection differ as a function of what they generally want and fear in social interactions.
KeywordsSocial motives Approach Avoidance Attribution Social interactions
This research was supported by Grant 100014_126868/1 (Project “Social Approach and Avoidance Motivation—The Role of Age”) from the Swiss National Science Foundation (PIs: Jana Nikitin and Alexandra M. Freund). We thank the Life-Management team for helpful discussions of the work reported in this article, and Mirjam Dönni, Christian Gross, and Mahmoud Hemmo for their help with data collection.
- Gable, S. L., & Berkman, E. T. (2008). Making connections and avoiding loneliness: Approach and avoidance social motives and goals. In A. J. Elliot (Ed.), Handbook of approach and avoidance motivation (pp. 204–216). New York, NY: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Annual review of psychology. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
- Mehrabian, A., & Ksionzky, S. (1974). A theory of affiliation. Lexington, MA: Health.Google Scholar
- Metalsky, G. I., Halberstadt, L. J., & Abramson, L. Y. (1987). Vulnerability to depressive mood reactions: Toward a more powerful test of the diathesis–stress and causal mediation components of the reformulated theory of depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 386–393. doi: 10.1037/0022-35220.127.116.116.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mezulis, A. H., Abramson, L. Y., Hyde, J. S., & Hankin, B. L. (2004). Is there a universal positivity bias in attributions? A meta-analytic review of individual, developmental, and cultural differences in the self-serving attributional bias. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 711–747. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.130.5.711.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Peterson, C., & Buchanan, G. M. (1995). Explanatory style: History and evolution of the field. In G. M. Buchanan & M. E. P. Seligman (Eds.), Explanatory style (pp. 1–20). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Poppe, P., Stiensmeier-Pelster, J., & Pelster, A. (2005). Attributionsstilfragebogen für Erwachsene: ASF-E [Attributional pattern questionnaire for adults]. Göttingen: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
- Sokolowski, K. (1986). Kognitionen und Emotionen in anschlussthematischen Situationen [Cognitions and emotions in affiliative situations]. Wuppertal: Bergische Universität.Google Scholar
- Weiner, B., Frieze, I., Kukla, A., Reed, L., Rest, S., & Rosenbaum, R. M. (1987). Perceiving the causes of success and failure. In E. E. Jones, D. E. Kanouse, H. H. Kelley, R. E. Nisbett, S. Valins, & B. Weiner (Eds.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior (pp. 95–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar