Anxiety makes us more welcoming of gossip

Do we evaluate gossipers from our own social circles differently to those outside of them? And how do our own traits temper our reactions towards those who gossip? These are the questions posed by Brodie Patton and Hirotaka Imada, both from Royal Holloway, University of London.

In their latest paper, they find that people like and evaluate those that share negative gossip less favourably than non-gossipers, regardless of whether or not they're a friend. Surprisingly, however, the results also show that people with high levels of anxiety evaluate gossipers more positively than those who aren't socially anxious.

Participants were 386 adults with an average age of 29 years old. Firstly, they completed a social anxiety questionnaire based on DSM-5 criteria, rating how often they'd felt anxious in social settings during the last week. The researchers then aimed to create within-experiment ingroups and outgroups by showing participants pairs of paintings (one by Paul Klee, the other by Wassily Kandinsky) and asking to choose their favourite. Based on this choice, they were placed in either Group A (Klee) or Group B (Kandinsky).

Next, participants were randomly assigned to another two groups, and asked to imagine an ingroup member who either gossiped a lot or not at all. They then rated this person on how likable, trustworthy, influential, and competent they seemed.

Analyses found that gossiping significantly reduced likeability and trustworthiness — whether or not the gossiper was part of the participants' ingroup. This, in line with previous research, reinforces the commonly-held idea that gossiping can make it much more likely someone will be disliked, regardless of circumstances.

However, when a participant had high levels of social anxiety, this wasn't the case. Those who were more anxious were also more forgiving, rating gossipers much more positively than others. This was the case both for likability and trustworthiness — as social anxiety increased, for example, trustworthiness ratings also increased by around 24%.

The team dubs this surprising outcome "the gossiper's paradox". While gossiping is generally seen as negative, and gossipers are usually evaluated poorly, there are specific situations or traits in observers that can lead to more favourable evaluations.

As for why would this be the case, Patton and Imada have a few suggestions. Firstly, it could be that gossip helps people with anxiety feel a sense of control and predictability in social contexts — that is, gossip provides information that helps them better understand the social world they inhabit. Socially anxious people may also rely on negative gossip to avoid interacting with people who might harm them, or can experience gossiping as a way to indirectly bond without the need for more direct, anxiety-inducing interaction.

There are, as ever, some limitations to the study, including the way that the in- and out-groups were formed. Preferring one artist to another is a fairly shallow basis for group formation, lacking an emotional or social relevance that can often be found in more naturally occurring groups based on shared interests, identities, or values. This may explain the absence of significant group-based effects on the evaluation of gossipers. Future research could explore this, looking more closely at the impact of gossip in real-life groups.

Ultimately, the study underscores the complexity of social judgment, highlighting just how much individual psychological traits can shape the way we interpret and evaluate others' behaviour in groups. As for takeaways, it also backs up previous research on the negative impact of gossiping — so no matter how well you think your conversational partner might receive the latest gossip, it's probably best to keep it to yourself.

Read the paper in full:
Patton, B., & Imada, H. (2025). The evaluation of negative gossipers: testing the role of group membership and social anxiety. Cogent Psychology, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2025.2489219

Want the latest in psychological research, straight to your inbox?
Sign up to Research Digest's free weekly newsletter.