This article presents 4 studies examining the impact of being ignored and excluded via computer-mediated communication (CMC). The focus is the differences between social-and cyberostracism. Study 1 replicated K. D. Williams, C. K. T. Cheung, and W. Choi's (2000) cyberostracism experiment, which showed negative consequences of being ostracized in a virtual ball toss game. Studies 2 and 3 examined ostracism in a chat room environment, again showing negative consequences of ostracism, even when compared with negatively charged inclusion. Study 4 directly compared responses to CMC with face-to-face (or social) ostracism. Results suggest that whereas both modes of ostracism are aversive, aspects of CMC provide targets with "virtual bravado" that might buffer negative effects of cyberostracism. Donelson R. Forsyth served as the action editor for this article.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Recent evidence suggests that Americans underestimate wealth inequality in the United States and favor a more equal wealth distribution (Norton & Ariely, ). Does this pattern reflect ideological dynamics unique to the United States, or is the phenomenon evident in other developed economies—such as Australia? We assessed Australians’ perceived and ideal wealth distributions and compared them to the actual wealth distribution. Although the United States and Australia differ in the degree of actual wealth inequality and in cultural narratives around economic mobility, the Australian data closely replicated the United States findings. Misperceptions of wealth inequality as well as preferences for more equal distributions may be common across developed economies. In addition, beliefs about wealth distribution only weakly predicted support for raising the minimum wage, suggesting that attitudes toward inequality may not translate into preferences for redistributive policies.