The inventory was translated into Ukrainian (Omelyanovich, 2017; Луценко, 2016). It comprises 138 items categorized into 12 scales: Neuroticism, Spontaneous aggressiveness, Depression, Irritability, Social orientation, Steadiness, Reactive aggressiveness, Shyness, Openness, Extraversion – introversion, Emotional lability, and Masculinity – Femininity. Participants responded ‘yes’ or ‘no’ based on whether the statements characterized them.

This personality test is translated and widely used by Ukrainian researchers (Cattell & Krug, 1986; Kokun et al., 2012). The test consists of 105 items that measure the following personality traits: warmth, reasoning, emotional stability, dominance, liveliness, rule-consciousness, social boldness, sensitivity, vigilance, abstractedness, privateness, apprehension, openness to change, self-reliance, perfectionism, tension.

The construct of self-attitude was assessed through the 110-item test devised by Stolin and Pantelieiev (1978). The inventory consists of 8 scales: Self-Confidence, Self-Authority, Mirror Self, Self-Worth, Self-Acceptance, Self-Rigidity, Inner Conflict, Self-Accusation. Participants respond based on whether they agree or disagree with the displayed statements.

The inventory assesses the structure of one’s interpersonal relationships and one’s most common behavior in a relationship context (Horowitz, 1996). The test consists of the list of 128 self-descriptive characteristics-epithets that participants should agree or disagree with. The test describes interpersonal relationships as domineering-leading, independent-dominant, straightforward-aggressive, distrustful-skeptical, submissively shy, dependent-obedient, cooperating-conventional and responsibly generous.

Developed by Rogers and Diamond, the test measures the construct of adaptation and personality traits that are essential for successful adaptation (Autleva, 2020). The inventory contains scales: Adaptability, Acceptance of Oneself, Acceptance of the others, Emotional comfort, Internal-External Locus of Control, Dominating, Escapism. The inventory consists of 101 items that are evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale (‘0’ – ‘strongly disagree’; ‘7’ – ‘strongly agree’).

The version of the inventory used in the current research assesses the common behavior patterns in group interactions (Kokun et al., 2012). It consists of 6 scales: dependance, independence, sociability, unsociability, acceptance of disagreement, avoidance of disagreements. Participants should answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to 60 statements.

The 75-item inventory measures one’s level of hostility using 8 scales: physical aggression, verbal aggression, indirect hostility, negativity, irritation, suspiciousness, offensiveness, guilt (Stepaniuk & Melnychenko, 2020). Participants respond on a 4-point Likert scale.

The Sociometric Test by J. L. Moreno was employed in its translated form to assess social relationships and the social status of a particular individual within the group (Fox, 1987). Consequently, all participants were categorized into four groups: stars, popular members, neglected members, and isolates – based on the number of connections within the group (Kovalenko & Korniev, 2006). Stars are participants with the most significant number of connections, popular members receive approximately half of all possible connections, neglected members receive less than half of all possible connections, and isolates do not establish any connections.

The interview comprises questions exploring the behavior tendencies of students, specifically focusing on the typical patterns of both ostracizers and victims of ostracism. For ostracizers, the discussion includes acts such as excluding or ignoring others, spreading gossip, withholding information, creating subgroups, and engaging in behavior that embitters others.

To gather information about behavior tendencies in students who have experienced ostracism, questions cover acts like social withdrawal, attempts to regain inclusion, and displays of apathetic behavior. The interview consists of 15 questions addressing the behavioral patterns of ostracizers, assessed using the ‘Behavior of the Ostracizer’ Scale. Another 15 questions focus on the behavioral patterns of victims of ostracism, evaluated with the ‘Behavior of the Victim of Ostracism’ Scale. Mentors respond with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to each question, with each ‘yes’ corresponding to one point on the respective scale. A total of 15 points indicate the highest level of either ostracizing behavior tendencies or victim behavioral patterns.

A total of 32 items (FPI, 16PF, The Self-Attitude Test, The Test of Social-psychological Adaptability, The Q-Sort, BDHI, DMI) underwent Principal Components Analysis, resulting in a six-factor solution that explained 58.4% of the variance. The extraction of these six factors relied on Eigenvalues and the outcomes of a scree test.

The first factor, describing dominating and leading tendencies, the need for control, the urge to defend one’s viewpoint, and playing an essential role in decision-making, is termed ‘Disposition to Personal Dominance’, explaining 13.6% of the variance. This factor contains the following items: ‘Dominance’ (0.906), ‘Acceptance of disagreement’ (0.876), ‘Dominating Tendencies’ (0.842), ‘Rule-consciousness’ (-0.795), ‘Sensitivity’ (-0.754), ‘Spontaneous Aggressiveness’ (0.718), ‘Domineering-leading Relationship Style’ (0.685), ‘Straightforward-aggressive Relationship Style’ (0.627), ‘Reactive Aggressiveness’ (0.593), ‘Physical Aggression’ (0.558), and ‘Verbal Aggression’ (0.514).

The second factor (11.5% of variance) is named ‘Disposition to Egocentrism,’ capturing tendencies to avoid decision-making, shift responsibility to others, and seek a privileged position in the group. The factor contains the following items: ‘Independent-dominant Relationship Style’ (0.887), ‘Self-confidence’ (0.836), ‘Vigilance’ (0.762), ‘Distrustful-skeptical’ (0.715), ‘Acceptance of Others’ (-0.669), ‘Suspiciousness’ (0.610), ‘Self-Authority’ (-0.548), and ‘Internal-External Locus of Control’ (-0.502).

The third factor (9.7% of variance), ‘Disposition to Independence,’ characterizes individuals who do not follow or respect the values or norms of others. The factor includes the following items: ‘Independence’ (0.781), ‘Escapism’ (-0.709), ‘Inner Conflict’ (-0.624), ‘Guilt’ (-0.558), and ‘Offensiveness’ (-0.514).

The fourth factor (8.9% of variance), ‘Disposition to Closeness,’ represents individuals who tend to keep a distance from others, not willing to share one’s thoughts or emotions with others. The factor contains the following items: ‘Openness’ (-0.745), ‘Warmth’ (-0.676), and ‘Sociability’ (-0.548).

The fifth factor (8.0% of variance), ‘Disposition to Negativity’, characterizes individuals purposefully acting against group members’ expectations or needs. The factor includes the following items: ‘Negativity’ (0.690), ‘Openness to Change’ (0.622), and ‘Privateness’ (-0.537).

The sixth factor (6.7% of variance), ‘Disposition to Personal Disadaptation’, characterizes individuals who fail to respond adequately and socially acceptably to social situations. The factor contains the following items: ‘Adaptability’ (-0.631) and ‘Neuroticism’ (0.544).

A total of 32 items (FPI, 16PF, The Self-Attitude Test, The Test of Social-psychological Adaptability, The Q-Sort, BDHI, DMI) underwent Principal Components Analysis, resulting in a six-factor solution that explained 59.7% of the variance. Extraction of the six factors was based on Eigenvalues and the results of a scree test.

The first factor (explaining 12.2% of variance), ‘Disposition to Negative Self-Attitude’, characterizes an individual with a negative self-view, frequent inner conflicts, and significant adaptation difficulties. The factor contains the following items: ‘Self-Acceptance’ (-0.968), ‘Self-Accusation’ (0.920), ‘Inner Conflict’ (0.848), ‘Acceptance of Oneself’ (-0.763), ‘Mirror Self’ (-0.681), ‘Self-Authority’ (-0.616), ‘Self-Confidence’ (-0.538).

The second factor (explaining 11.9% of variance), ‘Disposition to Suspiciousness,’ pertains to an individual perceiving their social environment as unsafe and untrustworthy, maintaining distance from others, and neglecting others’ needs. The factor contains the following items: ‘Vigilance’ (0.945), ‘Irritability’ (0.882), ‘Suspiciousness’ (0.806), ‘Distrustful-skeptical’ (0.747), ‘Emotional Stability’ (-0.698), ‘Depression’ (0.625), ‘Apprehension’ (0.543).

The third factor (explaining 10.4% of variance), ‘Disposition to Dependence,’ characterizes an individual feeling insecure in social contexts, leading to frequent conforming behavior. The factor contains the following items: ‘Dependance’ (0.928), ‘Dependent-obedient’ (0.835), ‘Dominating’ (-0.763), ‘Submissively Shy’ (0.696), ‘Dominance’ (-0.617), ‘Hostility’ (-0.530)

The fourth factor (explaining 9.3% of variance), ‘Disposition to Closeness’, characterizes an individual who tends to be reserved, avoids contact with others, and is unwilling to share personal information. The factor contains the following items: ‘Unsociability’ (0.825), ‘Warmth’ (-0.764), ‘Openness’ (-0.697), ‘Extraversion’ (-0.642), ‘Shyness’ (0.577)

The fifth factor (explaining 8.1% of variance), ‘Disposition to Low Self-Control’, refers to someone facing challenges in managing emotions and behavior, preferring immediate satisfaction over long-term benefits. The factor contains the following items: ‘Self-reliance’ (-0.776), ‘Tension’ (-0.715), ‘Sensitivity’ (-0.628), ‘Guilt’ (0.515).

The sixth factor (explaining 7.8% of variance), ‘Disposition to Self-Neglect,’ characterizes an individual neglecting their own needs, desires, and responsibilities towards others, opting for escapism in coping with difficulties. The factor contains the following items: ‘Avoidance of Disagreement’ (0.749), ‘Escapism’ (0.693), ‘Abstractedness’ (0.616), ‘Masculinity-Femininity’ (-0.528).

After conducting a comparative analysis using nonparametric statistical test The Mann-Whitney U test, it was revealed that there is a significant difference (p < 0.05) in personal dispositions between male and female ostracizers. Male ostracizers have higher levels of ‘Disposition to Personal Dominance’, ‘Disposition to Negativity’, ‘Disposition to Independence’, and ‘Disposition to Closeness’ (Table 1). Female ostracizers demonstrate higher levels of such factors as ‘Disposition to Egocentrism’ and ‘Disposition to Personal Disadaptation’.

A comparative analysis, utilizing the nonparametric statistical test, the Jonckheere-Terpstra, was conducted to explore differences in personal dispositions among ostracizers with various social statuses. The level of ‘Disposition to Personal Dominance’ is significantly higher among ‘stars,’ gradually decreasing among ‘popular’, ‘neglected members’, and ‘isolates’. The levels of ‘Disposition to Egocentrism’, ‘Disposition to Independence’, and ‘Disposition to Negativity’ are the highest among ‘stars’ and the lowest among ‘neglected members’ (Table 2). However, differences in the levels of ‘Disposition to Closeness’ and ‘Disposition to Personal Disadaptation’ among ostracizers of different social statuses appeared to be insignificant (p > 0.05).

After conducting a comparative analysis using the nonparametric statistical test, the Mann-Whitney U test, a significant difference (p < 0.05) emerged in the studied personal dispositions among male and female victims of ostracism, apart from ‘Disposition to Negative Self-Attitude’. Male victims of ostracism scored higher in ‘Disposition to Self-Neglect’ and ‘Disposition to Closeness’, while female victims of ostracism exhibited higher levels of ‘Disposition to Suspiciousness’, ‘Disposition to Low Self-Control’, and ‘Disposition to Dependence’ (Table 3).

A comparative analysis, utilizing the nonparametric statistical test, the Jonckheere-Terpstra, was conducted to explore differences in personal dispositions among victims of ostracism with various social statuses. No statistical significance was found in the levels of ‘Disposition to Suspiciousness,’ ‘Disposition to Low Self-Control’, and ‘Disposition to Self-Neglect’ among victims of ostracism of different social statuses. However, a significant statistical difference was observed in the levels of ‘Disposition to Negative Self-Attitude’, ‘Disposition to Dependence’, and ‘Disposition to Closeness’. The highest levels of these dispositions were found among isolated victims of ostracism, while the lowest levels were observed among those considered to be either ‘popular group members’ or ‘stars’ (Table 4).

In a regression analysis, personal dispositions, including ‘Disposition to Personal Dominance,’ ‘Disposition to Egocentrism’, ‘Disposition to Independence’, ‘Disposition to Closeness’, ‘Disposition to Negativity’, and ‘Disposition to Personal Disadaptation,’ were examined as predictors of ostracizing behavior towards other group members. The proposed multiple regression model successfully accounts for 61% of the variance in ostracizing behavior tendencies. Among the dispositions tested, only ‘Disposition to Personal Dominance’, ‘Disposition to Independence’, ‘Disposition to Negativity’, and ‘Disposition to Personal Disadaptation’ emerged as significant predictors of the model (p < 0.05), while scores for ‘Disposition to Egocentrism’ and ‘Disposition to Closeness’ were found to be non-significant (Table 5).

In a regression analysis, personal dispositions, including ‘Disposition to Negative Self-Attitude,’ ‘Disposition to Suspiciousness’, ‘Disposition to Dependence’, ‘Disposition to Closeness’, ‘Disposition to Low Self-Control’, and ‘Disposition to Self-Neglect’, were examined as predictors of the group behavior of ostracized individuals. The proposed multiple regression model successfully accounted for 62% of the variance in ostracizing behavior tendencies. Among the dispositions tested, only ‘Disposition to Negative Self-Attitude’, ‘Disposition to Dependence’, ‘Disposition to Closeness’, and ‘Disposition to Self-Neglect’ emerged as significant predictors of the model (p < 0.05), while scores for ‘Disposition to Suspiciousness’ and ‘Disposition to Low Self-Control’ were found to be non-significant (Table 6).