Trial reportJournal of behavioral addictions2026
When rejection backfires: Social exclusion and economic decision-making in gamblers.
Trial report in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aims: Economic decision-making deviates from rational choice models and is influenced by social factors, particularly fairness considerations and belonging needs. Social exclusion and altruistic punishment are intended to promote behavioral conformity, yet paradoxically may exacerbate rather than correct targeted behaviors among individuals with addictions already experiencing chronic rejection. Several preliminary studies show that social exclusion increases money desirability in general populations, however, the interaction between acute social exclusion and economic decision-making among individuals with gambling disorders (PGs)-marked by aberrant financial decision-making-remains unexplored. Methods: In a field study, 203 gamblers were recruited outside gambling venues and randomized to experience either social inclusion or exclusion via Cyberball, a virtual ball-tossing paradigm. Participants then completed an ultimatum game, making accept/reject decisions on fair and unfair monetary offers, followed by the Problem Gambling Severity Index. Results: Social exclusion increased unfair offer acceptance among PGs but had no effect on low- and moderate-risk gamblers. PGs accepted more unfair offers following exclusion than inclusion. Gambling severity had no effect on unfair offers acceptance. Neither social exclusion nor gambling severity affected fair offer acceptance. Discussion and conclusions: Social exclusion triggered utilitarian decision-making only among PGs. This selective effect suggests rejection compromises PGs' economic decision-making processes, shifting priorities toward immediate monetary gains over equitable outcomes. These findings reveal how social punishment creates self-reinforcing cycles where exclusion triggers the utilitarian mindset characterizing problematic gambling. Treatment and societal approaches relying on social consequences may inadvertently strengthen harmful patterns, highlighting the need for inclusion-based interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.