When destiny hurts: Implicit theories of relationships moderate aggressive responses to ostracism

a r t i c l e i n f o The current research investigates the role of implicit theories of relationships in modulating aggressive responses to ostracism. Three studies tested whether destiny beliefs (that potential relationships are either fundamentally compatible or not) predispose people to behave aggressively in the wake of ostracism. In Study 1, individual differences in destiny beliefs moderated the relationship between ostracism and aggressive affect. Two additional studies showed that manipulated destiny beliefs (vs. growth beliefs) caused ostracized participants to blast a provocateur with aversive noise (Study 2) and to give a destructive job candidate evaluation to a stranger (Study 3). These results highlight the significance of implicit theories in understanding risk factors for ostracism-related aggression. Introduction Why do setbacks trouble some people, leaving others unscathed? Cognitive factors, such as personal beliefs, offer a key to understanding how people respond when they cope with negative events These mindsets help people navigate through their world, showing them what to approach, what to avoid, and how to respond when things go well and when things go badly. Yet, it is unclear how mindsets about relationships – commonly referred to as – influence behavior when those bonds dissolve. The current investigation fills this gap in the literature by testing the hypothesis that destiny beliefs, defined as believing potential relationship partners are either compatible or they are not, have a negative effect on responses to ostracism. People who have a fixed mindset in domains unrelated to relationships experience difficulty in coping with setbacks; they become defensive and engage in behaviors meant to boost their feelings of self-worth (Molden & Dweck, 2006). Within the context of relationships, destiny beliefs may produce a similar defensive response to ostracism. Destiny theorists tend to attribute frustrating experiences to stable factors, whereas growth theorists attribute them to controlla-ble factors (Hong et al., 1999; Knee et al., 2003). Among people who hold strong destiny beliefs, ostracism represents a harsh and unchangeable judgment to their relationship well-being. As a result, they perceive lower levels of control following ostracism, compared to those who hold strong growth beliefs. A deprived sense of control magnifies aggression among ostracized individuals (Warburton, Williams, & Cairns, 2006). Therefore, relative to growth theorists, destiny theorists would be more likely to engage in aggressive responses, including aggressive affect and behavior, to restore their threatened sense of control following ostracism. To test this hypothesis, we conducted …