Individuals and groups can experience different forms of social exclusion across multiple domains of social life. Owing to its multivariate nature, a generalized approach to studying exclusion has been adopted in empirical work within the field of social psychology. As such, the relational needs thwarted by various forms of exclusion tend to be accounted for by the generalized construct, the need to belong. To increase the specification of these aspects in exclusion research, the interdisciplinary approach of critical discourse analysis and related analytic tools, such as the discursive construction of identity, are used to perform a contextual and systemic analyses of the relational needs implicated in conditions of everyday exclusion. In the discourse of a sample population in Beirut, Lebanon, we aimed to show how distinct relational needs such as acceptance and fitting in can be disentangled from one another, and from the term belonging, as a higher-order concept, disambiguated in natural language. Semi- structured interviews conducted using the language of belonging methodology involved images of socio-political importance as triggers for talk that generated rich data for critical discourse analysis. This resulted in a contextual analysis of sectarianism as exclusionary and a thematic analysis of other experiences of exclusion linked to gentrification, geopolitical division and globalization. Our findings suggest that, as hypothesised, individuals employ distinct terminology when alluding to different experiences of exclusion. This illustrates the benefits of interdisciplinary methods in accounting for social phenomena more fully, and highlights the need for increased specification of generalized constructs in future empirical work on social exclusion in social psychology.
Keywords: Social Exclusion, Relational Needs, Belonging, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Construction of Identity
Abrams, D., Hogg, M.A. and Marques, J.M. (2005). “A Social Psychological Framework for Understanding Social Inclusion and Exclusion”. In: Abrams D., Hogg, M.A. and Marques J.M. eds 2005.The Social Psychology of Inclusion and Exclusion. New York, NY, US: Psychology Press. Pp. 1-23.
Akan, M.F., Karim, M.R. and Chowdhury, A.M.K. (2019). “An Analysis of Arabic-English Translation: Problems and Prospects”. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 10(1), 58-65. DOI: 10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.1p.58.
Baumeister, R.F. and Leary, M.R. (1995). “The need to belong: desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation”. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.
Blackhart, G.C., Nelson, B.C., Knowles, M.L. and Baumeister, R.F. (2009). “Rejection elicits emotional reactions but neither causes immediate distress nor lowers self-esteem: a meta-analytic review of 192 studies on social exclusion”. Personality and Social Psychology Review: An Official Journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, 13(4), 269-309. DOI: 10.1177/1088868309346065.
Erman, B. (2001). “Pragmatic markers revisited with a focus on you know in adult and adolescent talk”. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(9), 1337-1359. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00066-7.
Festinger, L. (1954). “A theory of social comparison processes”. Human Relations 7. US: Sage Publications: Pp.117-140. DOI: 10.1177/001872675400700202.
Freake, R., Gentil, G. and Sheyholislami, J. (2010). “A bilingual corpus-assisted discourse study of the construction of nationhood and belonging in Quebec”: Discourse & Society, 22(1). DOI:10.1177/0957926510382842.
Gerber, J. and Wheeler, L. (2009). “On Being Rejected: A Meta-Analysis of Experimental Research on Rejection”.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(5), 468-488. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01158.x.
Haas, F., Deringer, L., Gast, V. and Rudolph, O. (2015). Human impersonal pronouns in populist discourse. Jena: Institut für Anglistik/Amerikanistik, Friedrich-Schiller Univesität. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.5042.0961.
Hartgerink, C.H.J., van Beest, I., Wicherts, J.M. and Williams, K.D. (2015). “The Ordinal Effects of Ostracism: A Meta-Analysis of 120 Cyberball Studies”. PLOS ONE, 10(5). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0127002. Kassir, S. and Fisk, R. (2010). Beirut. First edition. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Lakoff, G. (1973). “Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts”. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4), 458-508.
Larkin, C. (2010). “Remaking Beirut: Contesting Memory, Space, and the Urban Imaginary of Lebanese Youth”. City & Community, 9(4), 414-442. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6040.2010.01346.x
Llewellyn, T. (2010). Spirit of the Phoenix: Beirut and the Story of Lebanon. First Edition. Chicago, Ill: Chicago Review Press.
Mathieson, J., Popay, J., Enoch, E., Escorel, S., Hernández, M., Johnston, H. and Rispel, L. (2008). “Social exclusion: Meaning, measurement and experience and links to health inequality”. In: WHO social exclusion knowledge network background paper 1. Lancaster: Lancaster University. Pp. 1-91. Meinhof, U.H. and Galasiński, D. (2005).” The Language of Belonging”. In: Meinhof, U.H. and Galasiński, D. eds 2005. The Language of Belonging. Language and Globalization. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Pp. 13-49. DOI: 10.1057/9780230504301_2.
Monroe, K.V. (2016). The Insecure City: Space, Power, and Mobility in Beirut. Nine edition. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Naeff, J. (2018). Precarious Imaginaries of Beirut: A City’s Suspended Now. Leiden, The Netherlands: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-65933-6.
Richman, L.S. and Leary, M.R. (2009). “Reactions to discrimination, stigmatization, ostracism, and other forms of interpersonal rejection: A multimotive model”. Psychological Review, 116(2), 365-383. DOI: 10.1037/a0015250.
Salloukh, B.F., Barakat, R., Al-Habbal, J.S., Khattab, L.W. and Mikaelian, S. (2015). The Politics of Sectarianism in Postwar Lebanon. London: Pluto Press. DOI: 10.2307/j.ctt183p3d5.
Seidman, S. (2012). “The Politics of Cosmopolitan Beirut: From the Stranger to the Other”. Theory, Culture & Society, 29(2), 3-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276411410446
van Dijk, T.A. (2015). “Critical Discourse Analysis”. In: The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Tannen, D., Hamilton, H. E., Schifrin, D., John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Pp. 466-485. DOI: 10.1002/9781118584194.ch22.
van Dijk, T.A. (2008). Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511481499.
van Dijk, T.A. (2014). Discourse and Knowledge: A Sociocognitive Approach. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, K.D. and Jarvis, B. (2006). “Cyberball: A program for use in research on interpersonal ostracism and acceptance”. Behavior Research Methods, 38(1), 174-180. DOI: 10.3758/BF03192765.
Williams, K.D. (2009). “Chapter 6 Ostracism: A Temporal Need –Threat Model”. In: Zanna, M.P., ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 41, Elsevier Academic Press. Pp. 275-314. DOI: 10.1016/S0065- 2601(08)00406-1.
Wodak, R., de Cillia, R., Reisigl, M. et al. (2009). The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.