Prior research has shown that being excluded by computer-agents in experimental exclusion paradigms threatens individuals' basic needs to a similar extent as being excluded by humans. It is less clear, however, why this similarity between computer and human exclusion occurs, and whether it applies only to reactions immediately after the exclusion event (reflexive stage), or also to reactions that occur further downstream (e.g., reflective stage). Four studies (N = 1048) with three different exclusion paradigms provide several key insights: First, the similarity between computer and human exclusion is robust and pervasive, as Bayesian analyses provide consistent support that the source of exclusion (human vs. computer) does not affect reflexive need satisfaction. Second, this similarity also extends to reflective reactions and punishing behavior. Finally, the present studies extend our knowledge about the processes underlying this similarity by uncovering the role of anthropomorphism. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

先前的研究表明，在实验排除范式中被计算机代理排除在威胁个人基本需求的程度与被人类排除的程度相似。然而，不太清楚为什么会出现计算机和人类排斥之间的这种相似性，以及它是否仅适用于排斥事件之后的反应（反射阶段），还是也适用于更下游发生的反应（例如，反射阶段）。四项研究（N = 1048）具有三种不同的排除范式提供了几个关键见解：首先，计算机和人类排除之间的相似性是稳健和普遍的，因为贝叶斯分析提供了一致的支持，即排除来源（人类与计算机）不会影响反射性需求满足. 其次，这种相似性还延伸到反思反应和惩罚行为。最后，本研究通过揭示拟人化的作用，扩展了我们对这种相似性背后过程的认识。讨论了未来研究的意义和方向。