REALITYWIPE

RESEARCHERS

The Science of Relational Aggression: Exclusion and Gossip Are Real Aggression

3 the researchers behind it — If you've ever been frozen out of a group chat, talked about behind your back, or 'forgotten' from an invite list, your self-talk probably split two w

Institute of Child Development, University of Minnesota

Nicki R. Crick

Known for:Naming and defining relational aggression, and tracking its costs from childhood into adulthood

Key findings

  1. 1995

    Relational aggression — harming others through purposeful manipulation and damage of relationships, like exclusion and rumor-spreading — is a distinct form of aggression; in a sample of 491 children, its targets were more rejected by peers and reported more loneliness, depression and isolation. ↗

  2. 1999

    In a college sample, relational aggression was common among young adults and associated with adjustment difficulties — with relationally aggressive men as likely as women to be at risk, despite average gender differences in the behavior. ↗

University at Buffalo, The State University of New York

Jamie M. Ostrov

Known for:Developmental research on the forms and functions of relational aggression, from early childhood measures to adult self-reports

Key findings

  1. 2010

    In 1,387 adults, a validated self-report distinguished proactive, reactive and romantic relational aggression — with reactive relational aggression uniquely tied to a history of abuse, hostile attribution biases, and distress over ambiguous relational provocations, and elevated in adults with Intermittent Explosive Disorder. ↗

  2. 2010

    An integrated gender-linked model of aggression proposes that gender identity and gender schemas shape which form of aggression children adopt — they tend to prefer gender-consistent aggressive behavior — expanding social information-processing theory rather than treating relational aggression as exclusive to one gender. ↗

University of California, Los Angeles

Naomi I. Eisenberger

Known for:Neuroscience of social pain — showing that social rejection recruits brain regions overlapping those for physical pain

Key findings

  1. 2003

    Using fMRI during a Cyberball exclusion, found that the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex — linked to the distress of physical pain — was more active during exclusion, and its activation tracked how much social distress participants reported. ↗

  2. 2010

    In a collaboration testing the social-pain overlap, acetaminophen — an ordinary physical painkiller — reduced daily self-reported hurt feelings and dampened neural responses to social rejection over three weeks, relative to placebo. ↗

View full research file ↗All researchers