Running Head: REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMINITION 1

Which Hurts More?

The Effects of Rejection Versus Discrimination Psychological Needs

Maliesha N. Williams

Johnson C. Smith University

REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 2

ABSTRACT

The purpose of the present study was to examine differences in psychological needs for

belonging, self- esteem, control and meaningful existence between people who wrote about

experiences of rejection or discrimination and then completed an assessment of their

psychological needs for belonging, self –esteem, control and meaningful existence. A

convenience sample technique was given an online survey. 43 participants were chosen. 26

females and 17 males. People’s immediate reactions are influenced by contruels of the rejection

experience that predict 3 distinct motives for prosocial, antisocial, and socially avoidant

behavioral responses. WHAT WERE THE FINDINGS?

REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 3

Method

Participants

Forty-three participants (17 males, and 26 females) from a small Historically Black College and
University in Southeastern United States participated in the study. Participants ranged in age from
eighteen to forty-three, with an average age of 22.21 (SD= 5.72). The majority of participants were Black
or African American (97.7%) with the remaining participants identifying as other (2.3%).

Measures and Procedure

Rejection or Discrimination. First, participants were randomly assigned to one of two

conditions. In the first condition, participants wrote about an experience of rejection. They were asked
to describe a time when they did not feel like they was being rejected from a group. A time they felt like
they weren’t part of or not feeling included in the group whether it be friends, family, or significant
other. The circumstances that led them to feel like they were being rejected, and did it make them feel,
think, and behave. In the second condition, participants wrote about their experience of discrimination.
They were asked to describe a time they felt like they were discriminated against, and the circumstances
that led them to being discriminated against, and how did it made them feel, think, and behave. Both
participants were asked to rate how easy it is to recall being rejected or discriminated against. How easy
it was to recall the circumstances that led them to be discriminated or rejected against, and how easy
was it to recall the feelings, thoughts, and behaviors after they was discriminated and rejected against.
Each item was rated from 1, strongly disagree, to 7, strongly agree.

Needs Threat Scale. Next, participants completed the Needs Threat Scale (NTS; Williams, 2001).
The NTS is a 28-item measure that accesses needs for belonging, self-esteem, meaningful existence,
control, and mood. Each item is rated from 1, not at all, to 5, extremely. Example item from NTS
included, “I felt useless” and “I felt meaningless.” The NTS was found to be internally consistent (α= .94).

Results

It was hypothesized that there will be a difference in reported levels of belonging

between participants who wrote about an experience of rejection and participants who wrote about an

experience of discrimination. To test the hypothesis, an independent t test conducted looking at the

difference in levels of belonging between rejection and discrimination. The results did not support the
REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 4

hypothesis, t (41) = -.50, p= .62. There was not a significant difference between the two groups on levels

of belonging (see table 1 for means and standard deviation).

It was hypothesized that there will be a difference in reported levels of self- esteem between

participants who wrote about an experience of rejection and participants who wrote about an

experience of discrimination. To test the hypothesis, an independent t test conducted looking at the

difference in levels of belonging between rejection and discrimination. The results did not support the

hypothesis, t (41) =-1.24, p= .22. There was not a significant difference between the two groups on

levels of self-esteem.

It was hypothesized that there will be a difference in reported levels of meaningful existence

between participants who wrote about an experience of rejection and participants who wrote about an

experience of discrimination. To test the hypothesis, an independent t test conducted looking at the

difference in levels of belonging between rejection and discrimination. The results did not support the

hypothesis, t (41) = -1.69, p= .10. There was not a significant difference between the two groups on

levels of meaningful existence.

It was hypothesized that there will be a difference in reported levels of control between

participants who wrote about an experience of rejection and participants who wrote about an

experience of discrimination. To test the hypothesis, an independent t test conducted looking at the

difference in levels of belonging between rejection and discrimination. The results did not support the

hypothesis, t (41) = .96, p= .34. There was not a significant difference between the two groups on levels

of control.
REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 5
REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 6

Table 1

Means and Standard Deviations for Psychological Needs as a Function of Experience

Rejection Discrimination

Dependent Variable M SD M SD

Belonging 2.65 .91 2.79 .89

Self-Esteem 2.69 .96 3.10 1.21

Meaning Existence 2.93 1.06 3.52 1.20

Control 2.82 .85 3.05 .75

REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 7

Discussion

It was hypothesized that there would be a difference in needs for belongings, self-

esteem, control, and meaningful existence between participants who wrote about an experience

of rejection and those that wrote about an experience of discrimination. Results were not

significant for all four psychological needs. In other words, there was no significant differences

between rejection and discrimination for belonging, self- esteem, control, and meaningful

existence. Results was not significant for all four psychological needs. The results fit with the

model proposed by Richman and Leary because we propose in our model that one motive typically

dominates a person’s attention and actions at any moment, but it is important to stress that the others

are usually not far below the surface.

Limitations

One limitation of the study some participants did not complete all the materials, particular

writing about their experience of rejection or discrimination. This decreased the sample size,

possibly making it harder to find the effect predicated. Additionally, by not writing about an

experience, the effect of that experience on the psychology needs may not have been felt by the

participants. No other scale or variables should’ve been included

Future Research

Future research could use a larger sample size to account for missing data. Additionally, having

people complete the study in a laboratory may help increase the number of people who complete

all the materials. Future research should also include an inclusion to compare to rejection and

discrimination. We began with the assertion that interpersonal rejection has been studied under the

guise of several different phenomena, such as ostracism, prejudice, stigmatization, neglect, peer
REJECTION VERSUS DISCRIMININATION 8

rejection, romantic breakups, discrimination, betrayal, and so on, all of which share the common feature

of involving threats to a sense of relational value, belonging, and acceptance.

Our review of the broad rejection literature finds that people have a varied and vast array of

coping mechanisms for attempting to restore belonging following rejection. In many cases, such

restoration is not possible with the individual, group, or even society that perpetrated the rejection, but

our review finds that people often seek alternative sources of acceptance through developing new

relationships, fostering stronger ties with a stigmatized group, or using other strategies to remind

themselves of important relationships and to feel a temporary sense of belonging. Future research that

examines how people recover from rejection experiences would benefit from including measures of

multiple strategies that people can employ.