Background:
In common usage, the term “pain” is often used to denote emotional distress. In recent years, this broader use of the term has also permeated the scientific literature, notably to describe the distress of social exclusion (“social pain”) (Eisenberger, 2015). This raises the possibility that individuals might use pain scales to reflect their current emotional state, creating ambiguity around self-reported pain in clinical and experimental settings. To examine this possibility, we elicited social distress and then asked participants to rate pain both with and without explicit instructions on what should be considered pain. 

Methods:
Forty participants played a computerised ball-tossing game in a three-player social exclusion paradigm (cyberball). Participants initially received the ball twice, but were excluded on all subsequent trials. Following the trials, participants were asked to rate their pain and unpleasantness. To determine whether explicit instruction would alter pain rating behaviour, half the participants were given the IASP pain definition prior to making their ratings.

Results:
Despite receiving no nociceptive stimulation, participants rated the cyberball experience as painful, indicating that “pain” was being used to indicate a negative emotional state. This tendency was significantly reduced for individuals given the IASP definition prior to the cyberball trial (M=3.65 for uninstructed individuals, M=1.95 for instructed; t=2.18, p<0.01).  

Conclusion:
These results indicate that participants will use pain scales to rate their emotional state, even in the absence of any nociceptive stimulation. This behaviour was significantly reduced

UNINSTRUCTED PARTICIPANTS USE PAIN SCALES TO INDICATE SOCIAL DISTRESS