-
Nature Human Behaviour Sep 2022Third-party punishment of antisocial others is unique to humans and seems to be universal across cultures. However, its emergence in ontogeny remains unknown. We...
Third-party punishment of antisocial others is unique to humans and seems to be universal across cultures. However, its emergence in ontogeny remains unknown. We developed a participatory cognitive paradigm using gaze-contingency techniques, in which infants can use their gaze to affect agents displayed on a monitor. In this paradigm, fixation on an agent triggers the event of a stone crushing the agent. Throughout five experiments (total N = 120), we show that eight-month-old infants punished antisocial others. Specifically, infants increased their selective looks at the aggressor after watching aggressive interactions. Additionally, three control experiments excluded alternative interpretations of their selective gaze, suggesting that punishment-related decision-making influenced looking behaviour. These findings indicate that a disposition for third-party punishment of antisocial others emerges in early infancy and emphasize the importance of third-party punishment for human cooperation. This behavioural tendency may be a human trait acquired over the course of evolution.
Topics: Aggression; Antisocial Personality Disorder; Humans; Infant; Personality; Punishment
PubMed: 35680993
DOI: 10.1038/s41562-022-01354-2 -
Utilitas Mar 2021In this article, I argue that even if we hold that at least some paternalistic behaviour is impermissible when directed towards innocent persons, in certain cases, the...
In this article, I argue that even if we hold that at least some paternalistic behaviour is impermissible when directed towards innocent persons, in certain cases, the same behaviour is permissible when directed towards criminal offenders. I also defend the claim that in some cases it is morally preferable to behave paternalistically towards offenders as an alternative to traditional methods of punishment. I propose that the reason paternalistic behaviour is sometimes permissible towards an offender is the same reason that inflicting intentional harm on an offender is permissible - namely, that it is sometimes a morally justified method of punishing an offender for his wrongdoing.
PubMed: 34257479
DOI: 10.1017/S0953820820000254 -
Australian and New Zealand Journal of... Jun 2023Across all of Australia's states and territories, it is legal for a parent or carer to hit their child. In this paper, we outline the legal context for corporal... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Across all of Australia's states and territories, it is legal for a parent or carer to hit their child. In this paper, we outline the legal context for corporal punishment in Australia and the argument for its reform.
METHODS
We review the laws that allow corporal punishment, the international agreements on children's rights, the evidence on the effects of corporal punishment, and outcomes of legislative reform in countries that have changed their laws to prohibit corporal punishment.
RESULTS
Legislative reform typically precedes attitude changes and reductions in the use of corporal punishment. Countries with the most ideal outcomes have instigated public health campaigns educating the population about law reform while also providing access to alternative non-violent discipline strategies.
CONCLUSIONS
Extensive evidence exists demonstrating the adverse effects of corporal punishment. When countries change legislation, educate the public about these effects, and provide alternative strategies for parents, rates of corporal punishment decrease.
IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH
We recommend law reform in Australia to prohibit corporal punishment, a public health campaign to increase awareness of corporal punishment and its effects, provision of access for parents to alternative evidence-based strategies to assist in parenting, and a national parenting survey to monitor outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Child; Punishment; Parents; Parenting; Health Promotion; Australia; Child Abuse
PubMed: 37142485
DOI: 10.1016/j.anzjph.2023.100044 -
Current Opinion in Psychology Feb 2022Direct and indirect reciprocity are two fundamental mechanisms that promote prosocial behavior within groups and across societies. Here, we review recent work that... (Review)
Review
Direct and indirect reciprocity are two fundamental mechanisms that promote prosocial behavior within groups and across societies. Here, we review recent work that illustrates how a (direct and indirect) reciprocity framework can illuminate our understanding of several factors related to prosocial behavior - namely group membership, gossip, and third-party punishment. We propose that each of these factors can promote prosocial behavior via proximate psychological mechanisms related to direct and indirect reciprocity: reputational concern, expectations, and anticipation of future interaction. Finally, we discuss the implications of adopting such a framework and highlight a number of avenues for future research.
Topics: Altruism; Communication; Cooperative Behavior; Humans; Punishment
PubMed: 34481332
DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.003 -
Lancet (London, England) Jul 2021Physical punishment is increasingly viewed as a form of violence that harms children. This narrative review summarises the findings of 69 prospective longitudinal... (Review)
Review
Physical punishment is increasingly viewed as a form of violence that harms children. This narrative review summarises the findings of 69 prospective longitudinal studies to inform practitioners and policy makers about physical punishment's outcomes. Our review identified seven key themes. First, physical punishment consistently predicts increases in child behaviour problems over time. Second, physical punishment is not associated with positive outcomes over time. Third, physical punishment increases the risk of involvement with child protective services. Fourth, the only evidence of children eliciting physical punishment is for externalising behaviour. Fifth, physical punishment predicts worsening behaviour over time in quasi-experimental studies. Sixth, associations between physical punishment and detrimental child outcomes are robust across child and parent characteristics. Finally, there is some evidence of a dose-response relationship. The consistency of these findings indicates that physical punishment is harmful to children and that policy remedies are warranted.
Topics: Child; Child Behavior; Child Protective Services; Child Rearing; Domestic Violence; Humans; Parent-Child Relations; Punishment
PubMed: 34197808
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00582-1 -
Human Brain Mapping Oct 2021Motivational influences on cognitive control play an important role in shaping human behavior. Cognitive facilitation through motivators such as prospective reward or...
Motivational influences on cognitive control play an important role in shaping human behavior. Cognitive facilitation through motivators such as prospective reward or punishment is thought to depend on regions from the dopaminergic mesocortical network, primarily the ventral tegmental area (VTA), inferior frontal junction (IFJ), and anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). However, how interactions between these regions relate to motivated control remains elusive. In the present functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we used dynamic causal modeling (DCM) to investigate effective connectivity between left IFJ, ACC, and VTA in a task-switching paradigm comprising three distinct motivational conditions (prospective monetary reward or punishment and a control condition). We found that while prospective punishment significantly facilitated switching between tasks on a behavioral level, interactions between IFJ, ACC, and VTA were characterized by modulations through prospective reward but not punishment. Our DCM results show that IFJ and VTA modulate ACC activity in parallel rather than by interaction to serve task demands in reward-based cognitive control. Our findings further demonstrate that prospective reward and punishment differentially affect neural control mechanisms to initiate decision-making.
Topics: Adult; Cerebral Cortex; Connectome; Decision Making; Executive Function; Humans; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Models, Theoretical; Motivation; Punishment; Reward; Young Adult
PubMed: 34173997
DOI: 10.1002/hbm.25564 -
Journal of Neurochemistry Jun 2021The risk of an aversive consequence occurring as the result of a reward-seeking action can have a profound effect on subsequent behavior. Such aversive events can be... (Review)
Review
The risk of an aversive consequence occurring as the result of a reward-seeking action can have a profound effect on subsequent behavior. Such aversive events can be described as punishers, as they decrease the probability that the same action will be produced again in the future and increase the exploration of less risky alternatives. Punishment can involve the omission of an expected rewarding event ("negative" punishment) or the addition of an unpleasant event ("positive" punishment). Although many individuals adaptively navigate situations associated with the risk of negative or positive punishment, those suffering from substance use disorders or behavioral addictions tend to be less able to curtail addictive behaviors despite the aversive consequences associated with them. Here, we discuss the psychological processes underpinning reward seeking despite the risk of negative and positive punishment and consider how behavioral assays in animals have been employed to provide insights into the neural mechanisms underlying addictive disorders. We then review the critical contributions of dopamine signaling to punishment learning and risky reward seeking, and address the roles of interconnected ventral striatal, cortical, and amygdala regions to these processes. We conclude by discussing the ample opportunities for future study to clarify critical gaps in the literature, particularly as related to delineating neural contributions to distinct phases of the risky decision-making process.
Topics: Animals; Cerebral Cortex; Corpus Striatum; Humans; Limbic System; Mesencephalon; Neural Pathways; Reward; Risk-Taking; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 33704784
DOI: 10.1111/jnc.15342 -
Current Protocols in Neuroscience Sep 2020Deficits in decision making are at the heart of many psychiatric diseases, such as substance abuse disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Consequently,...
Deficits in decision making are at the heart of many psychiatric diseases, such as substance abuse disorders and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Consequently, rodent models of decision making are germane to understanding the neural mechanisms underlying adaptive choice behavior and how such mechanisms can become compromised in pathological conditions. A critical factor that must be integrated with reward value to ensure optimal decision making is the occurrence of consequences, which can differ based on probability (risk of punishment) and temporal contiguity (delayed punishment). This article will focus on two models of decision making that involve explicit punishment, both of which recapitulate different aspects of consequences during human decision making. We will discuss each behavioral protocol, the parameters to consider when designing an experiment, and finally how such animal models can be utilized in studies of psychiatric disease. © 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol 1: Behavioral training Support Protocol: Equipment testing Alternate Protocol: Reward discrimination Basic Protocol 2: Risky decision-making task (RDT) Basic Protocol 3: Delayed punishment decision-making task (DPDT).
Topics: Animals; Behavior, Animal; Behavioral Research; Conditioning, Operant; Decision Making; Models, Animal; Neurosciences; Punishment; Rats; Reward
PubMed: 32687693
DOI: 10.1002/cpns.100 -
Current Opinion in Psychology Feb 2022Theory and experiments suggest people have different strategies (1) to condition their prosocial behavior in ways that maximize individual benefits and (2) to punish... (Review)
Review
Theory and experiments suggest people have different strategies (1) to condition their prosocial behavior in ways that maximize individual benefits and (2) to punish others who have exploited their own and others' prosocial behaviors. To date, most research testing existing theories has relied on experiments. However, documenting prosocial and punishment behaviors outside of the laboratory via experience sampling and diary methods can yield additional, rich insights. Recent work demonstrates these methods can describe social behaviors in daily life and be used to test theory about how behaviors change across situations and relationships. These methods have exposed discrepancies between what people experience in daily life and the problems researchers want to solve to understand the nature of human prosociality.
Topics: Altruism; Ecological Momentary Assessment; Humans; Problem Solving; Punishment; Social Behavior
PubMed: 34508966
DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.08.015 -
Proceedings. Biological Sciences Nov 2021Economic experiments have suggested that cooperative humans will altruistically match local levels of cooperation (conditional cooperation) and pay to punish...
Economic experiments have suggested that cooperative humans will altruistically match local levels of cooperation (conditional cooperation) and pay to punish non-cooperators (altruistic punishment). Evolutionary models have suggested that if altruists punish non-altruists this could favour the evolution of costly helping behaviours (cooperation) among strangers. An often-key requirement is that helping behaviours and punishing behaviours form one single conjoined trait (strong reciprocity). Previous economics experiments have provided support for the hypothesis that punishment and cooperation form one conjoined, altruistically motivated, trait. However, such a conjoined trait may be evolutionarily unstable, and previous experiments have confounded a fear of being punished with being surrounded by cooperators, two factors that could favour cooperation. Here, we experimentally decouple the fear of punishment from a cooperative environment and allow cooperation and punishment behaviour to freely separate (420 participants). We show, that if a minority of individuals is made immune to punishment, they (i) learn to stop cooperating on average despite being surrounded by high levels of cooperation, contradicting the idea of conditional cooperation and (ii) often continue to punish, 'hypocritically', showing that cooperation and punishment do not form one, altruistically motivated, linked trait.
Topics: Altruism; Biological Evolution; Cooperative Behavior; Game Theory; Humans; Punishment
PubMed: 34753350
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2021.1611