-
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal... Nov 2021Cooperative behaviour has been extensively studied as a choice between cooperation and defection. However, the possibility to not participate is also frequently...
Cooperative behaviour has been extensively studied as a choice between cooperation and defection. However, the possibility to not participate is also frequently available. This type of problem can be studied through the optional public goods game. The introduction of the 'Loner' strategy' allows players to withdraw from the game, which leads to a cooperator-defector-loner cycle. While pro-social punishment can help increase cooperation, anti-social punishment-where defectors punish cooperators-causes its downfall in both experimental and theoretical studies. In this paper, we introduce social norms that allow agents to condition their behaviour to the reputation of their peers. We benchmark this with respect both to the standard optional public goods game and to the variant where all types of punishment are allowed. We find that a social norm imposing a more moderate reputational penalty for opting out than for defecting increases cooperation. When, besides reputation, punishment is also possible, the two mechanisms work synergically under all social norms that do not assign to loners a strictly worse reputation than to defectors. Under this latter set-up, the high levels of cooperation are sustained by conditional strategies, which largely reduce the use of pro-social punishment and almost completely eliminate anti-social punishment. This article is part of the theme issue 'The language of cooperation: reputation and honest signalling'.
Topics: Biological Evolution; Cooperative Behavior; Game Theory; Models, Theoretical; Punishment; Social Norms
PubMed: 34601913
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0293 -
Developmental Psychology May 2022Third-party punishment has been regarded as an important mechanism to promote fairness. Although previous research has shown that children aged 6 and older punish unfair...
Third-party punishment has been regarded as an important mechanism to promote fairness. Although previous research has shown that children aged 6 and older punish unfair behaviors at a personal cost, it is unknown whether they actually intend to establish equality or whether equality is a mere byproduct of punishment. In this preregistered study, = 60 five- to 9-year-olds witnessed that an agent made unfair resource allocations to a peer. Children could then decide not only whether to punish but also how much to punish. We found that with age, children's intervention is more likely to equalize outcomes between third parties (e.g., turning 3:1 into 1:1). In conclusion, the egalitarian motive to reduce differences in payoffs could underlie children's punishment over development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Topics: Child; Child Behavior; Cooperative Behavior; Humans; Motivation; Peer Group; Punishment
PubMed: 35324225
DOI: 10.1037/dev0001331 -
Nature Reviews. Neuroscience Jan 2014Criminal behaviour and violence are increasingly viewed as worldwide public health problems. A growing body of knowledge shows that criminal behaviour has a... (Review)
Review
Criminal behaviour and violence are increasingly viewed as worldwide public health problems. A growing body of knowledge shows that criminal behaviour has a neurobiological basis, and this has intensified judicial interest in the potential application of neuroscience to criminal law. It also gives rise to important questions. What are the implications of such application for predicting future criminal behaviour and protecting society? Can it be used to prevent violence? And what are the implications for the way offenders are punished?
Topics: Criminal Psychology; Criminals; Criminology; Forecasting; Humans; Punishment; Violence
PubMed: 24326688
DOI: 10.1038/nrn3640 -
Neuro-degenerative Diseases 2021We aimed to investigate costly punishment in patients with Huntington's disease (HD).
OBJECTIVE
We aimed to investigate costly punishment in patients with Huntington's disease (HD).
BACKGROUND
HD is an autosomal dominant neurodegenerative disease with motor, cognitive, and psychiatric symptoms. As neuropsychiatric abnormalities often precede motor symptoms, we wanted to assess whether costly punishment is part of the neuropsychological profile of patients with HD.
METHODS
A total of 40 non-demented subjects were prospectively enrolled in this study with a between-subject design comparing manifest HD patients (n = 18) to healthy controls (HC; n = 22). All participants performed 8 rounds of a costly punishment task, in which money was shared unevenly in 5 rounds or in a fair manner in the remaining 3 rounds. Participants then had to decide whether they wanted to punish the trustee. Furthermore, all participants underwent neuropsychological background tasks.
RESULTS
HD patients performed worse in the neuropsychological background tests compared to HC (all p values <0.05). Moreover, HD patients punished more often in fair (Wald χ2 = 5.03, p = 0.025) but not in unfair rounds (Wald χ2 = 1.63, p = 0.202).
CONCLUSIONS
Our results demonstrate increased costly punishment during fair conditions in HD patients. Whether this behaviour is due to a lack of recognition of social norms, an impairment in top-down inhibition, or an effect of antidopaminergic medication remains unclear.
Topics: Humans; Huntington Disease; Neurodegenerative Diseases; Neuropsychological Tests; Punishment
PubMed: 34706364
DOI: 10.1159/000520303 -
Nature Communications Jul 2020Across societies, humans punish norm violations. To date, research on the antecedents and consequences of punishment has largely relied upon agent-based modeling and...
Across societies, humans punish norm violations. To date, research on the antecedents and consequences of punishment has largely relied upon agent-based modeling and laboratory experiments. Here, we report a longitudinal study documenting punishment responses to norm violations in daily life (k = 1507; N = 257) and test pre-registered hypotheses about the antecedents of direct punishment (i.e., confrontation) and indirect punishment (i.e., gossip and social exclusion). We find that people use confrontation versus gossip in a context-sensitive manner. Confrontation is more likely when punishers have been personally victimized, have more power, and value offenders more. Gossip is more likely when norm violations are severe and when punishers have less power, value offenders less, and experience disgust. Findings reveal a complex punishment psychology that weighs the benefits of adjusting others' behavior against the risks of retaliation.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Behavior; Emotions; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Morals; Motivation; Punishment; Risk Factors; Young Adult
PubMed: 32647165
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-17286-2 -
Science (New York, N.Y.) Aug 1963The degree of suppression of on-going, food-motivated behavior induced by punishing electric shock was exponentially related to the intensity of the aversive stimulus....
The degree of suppression of on-going, food-motivated behavior induced by punishing electric shock was exponentially related to the intensity of the aversive stimulus. No evidence for recovery from these effects during punishment sessions was observed.
Topics: Animals; Behavior; Electroshock; Punishment; Shock
PubMed: 14013457
DOI: 10.1126/science.141.3580.528-a -
Nature Human Behaviour Nov 2019Human groups can often maintain high levels of cooperation despite the threat of exploitation by individuals who reap the benefits of cooperation without contributing to...
Human groups can often maintain high levels of cooperation despite the threat of exploitation by individuals who reap the benefits of cooperation without contributing to its costs. Prominent theoretical models suggest that cooperation is particularly likely to thrive if people join forces to curb free riding and punish their non-contributing peers in a coordinated fashion. However, it is unclear whether and, if so, how people actually condition their punishment of peers on punishment behaviour by others. Here we provide direct evidence that many people prefer coordinated punishment. With two large-scale decision-making experiments (total n = 4,320), we create minimal and controlled conditions to examine preferences for conditional punishment and cleanly identify how the punishment decisions of individuals are impacted by the punishment behaviour by others. We find that the most frequent preference is to punish a peer only if another (third) individual does so as well. Coordinated punishment is particularly common among participants who shy away from initiating punishment. With an additional experiment we further show that preferences for conditional punishment are unrelated to well-studied preferences for conditional cooperation. Our results highlight the importance of conditional preferences in both positive and negative reciprocity, and they provide strong empirical support for theories that explain cooperation based on coordinated punishment.
Topics: Adult; Anger; Cooperative Behavior; Decision Making; Female; Humans; Male; Punishment; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 31477909
DOI: 10.1038/s41562-019-0707-2 -
The Journal of Applied Psychology Oct 2017The trade-off between mercy and justice is a classic moral dilemma, particularly for organizational leaders and managers. In 3 complementary studies, we investigated how...
The trade-off between mercy and justice is a classic moral dilemma, particularly for organizational leaders and managers. In 3 complementary studies, we investigated how resolving the "punishment dilemma" influences interpersonal trust. Study 1 used controlled scenarios to show that uninvolved observers trusted leaders who administered large or medium punishment more than leaders who administered no punishment when transgressors deserved punishment. At the same time, large punishment decreased trust more than medium or no punishment for less deserving targets. Study 2's similar scenarios showed that leaders who administered punishment lost trust when they subsequently received benefits even though it was not clear whether their benefits resulted from their act of punishment. Study 3 provided a behavioral replication of these results. These findings suggest that people trusted punishers more than nonpunishers, but only when punishers' motives were not personal revenge. In the discussion, we explore the practical and theoretical implications of these results for organizations. (PsycINFO Database Record
Topics: Adult; Employment; Female; Humans; Leadership; Male; Punishment; Social Behavior; Trust
PubMed: 28471207
DOI: 10.1037/apl0000178 -
Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin Aug 2019The purpose of these studies was to examine the principles people engage in when thinking about punishment, using a new measure (the Punishment Orientation Questionnaire...
The purpose of these studies was to examine the principles people engage in when thinking about punishment, using a new measure (the Punishment Orientation Questionnaire [POQ]). Although traditional conceptualizations of punishment divide it into utilitarianism (e.g., deterrence) and retributivism ("eye for an eye"), we argue that a more useful metric of lay attitudes concerns orientation toward or away from punishment. After pilot testing and factor analysis, we used item response theory to assess four scales: prohibitive utilitarianism (limiting punishment based on utility), prohibitive retributivism (aversion to punishing innocent people), permissive utilitarianism (willingness to give strict punishment based on the benefits thereof), and permissive retributivism (desire for just deserts). The POQ showed good predictive validity for capital jury eligibility and sentencing recommendation in response to a death penalty trial stimulus. This study provides a better understanding of how classic punishment philosophies manifest among laypersons and contributes data outside of classical test theory.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Attitude; Capital Punishment; Decision Making; Ethical Theory; Factor Analysis, Statistical; Female; Humans; Jurisprudence; Male; Middle Aged; Pilot Projects; Psychometrics; Punishment; Surveys and Questionnaires; Young Adult
PubMed: 30632453
DOI: 10.1177/0146167218818485 -
Social Cognitive and Affective... Jun 2022Costly punishment describes decisions of an interaction partner to punish an opponent for violating rules of fairness at the expense of personal costs. Here, we extend...
Costly punishment describes decisions of an interaction partner to punish an opponent for violating rules of fairness at the expense of personal costs. Here, we extend the interaction process by investigating the impact of a socio-emotional reaction of the opponent in response to the punishment that indicates whether punishment was successful or not. In a modified Ultimatum game, emotional facial expressions of the proposer in response to the decision of the responder served as feedback stimuli. We found that both honored reward following acceptance of an offer (smiling compared to neutral facial expression) and successful punishment (sad compared to neutral facial expression) elicited a reward positivity, indicating that punishment was the intended outcome. By comparing the pattern of results with a probabilistic learning task, we show that the reward positivity on sad facial expressions was specific for the context of costly punishment. Additionally, acceptance rates on a trial-by-trial basis were altered according to P3 amplitudes in response to the emotional facial reaction of the proposer. Our results are in line with the concept of costly punishment as an intentional act following norm-violating behavior. Socio-emotional stimuli have an important influence on the perception and behavior in economic bargaining.
Topics: Decision Making; Emotions; Facial Expression; Humans; Punishment; Reward
PubMed: 35077566
DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsab126