Author
Listed:
- Qiuyi Kong
(Beijing Normal University at Zhuhai
Beijing Normal University)
- Nicholas Currie
(The University of Otago)
- Kangning Du
(The University of Otago)
- John A. Hunter
(The University of Otago)
- Ted Ruffman
(The University of Otago)
Abstract
Previous research reveals that older adults have relatively intact well-being when excluded by others as compared to young adults. This observation can be attributed to two plausible explanations: Either older adults are unaware of their exclusion, thereby shielding their well-being from its impact, or they recognize the exclusion but respond to it rationally. We carried out two studies to compare young and older adults’ awareness of and response to exclusion, and explored its potential mechanisms by assessing the explanatory roles of loneliness, general cognition, and rejection sensitivity. Study 1 measured young and older adults’ loneliness, awareness of exclusion, and needs satisfaction after playing the Cyberball game, and Study 2 further examined other potential correlates including processing speed, working memory, and rejection sensitivity. Over the two studies, older adults were not worse at recognizing exclusion, and sometimes better than young adults. Older adults’ awareness of exclusion predicted their responses to exclusion, whereas the same link was absent in younger adults. Despite older adults’ relatively good performance, there were individual differences in recognizing exclusion; older adults with better general cognition and lower rejection sensitivity were particularly adept. In sum, older adults can be as aware of exclusion as young adults, but rather than reacting in an emotional way that is detached from reality, older adults are more likely to respond to it rationally based on the severity of exclusion they have perceived.
Suggested Citation
Qiuyi Kong & Nicholas Currie & Kangning Du & John A. Hunter & Ted Ruffman, 2025.
"Older adults know when they have been left out but they respond rationally,"
European Journal of Ageing, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-14, December.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:eujoag:v:22:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10433-025-00845-1
DOI: 10.1007/s10433-025-00845-1
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujoag:v:22:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s10433-025-00845-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.