The effects of inclusion and overinclusion: explanations for treatment matter

ABSTRACT

The current work quantitatively explored whether the explanation for overinclusion moderates its effect. In Study 1, female participants were excluded, included, or overincluded in a virtual ball-tossing game and given reason to believe this treatment was due to their gender or not. In Study 2, female participants imagined a scenario in which they were included or overincluded due to their gender or not. The effect of inclusion versus overinclusion on participants’ need satisfaction was significantly moderated by the explanation for this treatment in both studies. This work suggests that including or even overincluding members of traditionally underrepresented groups is not sufficient for members of these communities to have positive group experiences; the explanations they have for their treatment matters.

KEYWORDS:

• Overinclusion
• inclusion
• minority spotlight effect
• gender

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The Study 2 dataset is available upon request from the first author. The consent form participants signed in Study 1 indicated that their data would not be shared outside of the immediate research team, and thus prevents us from sharing the Study 1 dataset publicly.

Notes

1. Although not of primary interest to the current work, need satisfaction and positive mood were assessed both reflexively and reflectively, consistent with much of the exclusion literature and the temporal need-threat model (Williams, 2009). This model posits that we detect exclusion rapidly and crudely given that in our evolutionary history, expulsion from groups likely meant death. However, these reflexive reactions dissipate quickly (Wesselmann et al., 2012) once people are able to reflect on the situation and make attributions based on situational context. Analyses of the timing effects in Study 1 yielded findings consistent with this rationale. Complete reports of the timing effects can be found here: [https://osf.io/ebq2k/?view_only=8e23c1ccb69c4d5292e05c66e5c4b81b].

2. In both studies, additional demographic information not mentioned in text and personality and exploratory items were also included to aid future research. These variables include attachment style, strength of gender identification, system justification, need to belong, need for uniqueness, perceived group cohesion, perceived group warmth, perceived group competence, expectations regarding treatment, in-group comparisons, a description of what participants imagined during the mental visualization task in Study 1, participants’ memories for names of the other players in the mental visualization task in Study 1, and the number of group members imagined in Study 2. All of the measures are available from the first author.