The role of perspective taking and emotions in punishing identified and unidentified wrongdoers

We present two studies examining the effect of identifiability on willingness to punish, emphasising that identifiability of the wrongdoer may increase or decrease willingness to punish depending on the punisher's perspective. When taking the wrongdoer's perspective, identifiability increases pity and decreases anger towards the wrongdoer, leading to a lighter punishment. On the other hand, when adopting the injured perspective, identifiability decreases pity and increases anger, resulting in a severe punishment. We show that while deliberation and rational factors affect the decision regardless of identification, the role of emotions in the decision is greater in the identified condition. Possible implications for public and educational policy are discussed.     

Anger,Exposure to Violence,and Intragroup Conflict: A “Lab in the Field” Experiment in Southern Israel

I examine how anger stemming from violence in the Israel‐Palestine conflict influences intragroup retaliation. In July 2010 I conducted a series of experiments in two cities in the Southern District of Israel affected to varying degrees (high and low) by rocket fire from the Gaza Strip. For each experiment, subjects were partnered anonymously with a member of their community. They were then exposed to one of two emotional manipulations: one that induced anger or one that did not. Finally, each subject was given an opportunity to keep an endowment or allocate it towards destroying a portion, or all, of their partner's income (“pay to punish”) in retaliation for their partner having taken money from them previously. This decision to “pay to punish” was designed to closely mimic the costly nature of conflict. The findings suggest that anger has a conditional effect on decisions to pay to punish: in Sderot (most affected by rocket fire), anger decreases punishment, while in Ofakim (less affected), it increases punishment. Additionally, higher exposure to violence made subjects more likely to engage in negative reciprocity.     

The devil you know: the effects of identifiability on punishment

Prior research has confirmed Thomas Schelling's observation that people are more sympathetic and hence generous toward specific identified victims than toward “statistical” victims who are yet to be identified. In the study presented in this article we demonstrate an equivalent effect for punitiveness. We find that people are more punitive toward identified wrongdoers than toward equivalent, but unidentified, wrongdoers, even when identifying the wrongdoer conveys no meaningful information about him or her. To account for the effect of identifiability on both generosity and punitiveness, we propose that affective reactions of any type are stronger toward an identified than toward an unidentified target. Consistent with such an account, the effect of identifiability on punishing behavior was mediated by self‐reported anger. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Unintended,but still blameworthy: the roles of awareness,desire, and anger in negligence,restitution, and punishment

Two experiments (Experiment 1 N?=?149, Experiment 2 N?=?141) investigated how two mental states that underlie how perceivers reason about intentional action (awareness of action and desire for an outcome) influence blame and punishment for unintended (i.e., negligent) harms, and the role of anger in this process. Specifically, this research explores how the presence of awareness (of risk in acting, or simply of acting) and/or desire in an acting agent's mental states influences perceptions of negligence, judgements that the acting agent owes restitution to a victim, and the desire to punish the agent, mediated by anger. In both experiments, awareness and desire led to increased anger at the agent and increased perception of negligence. Anger mediated the effect of awareness and desire on negligence rather than negligence mediating the effect of mental states on anger. Anger also mediated punishment, and negligence mediated the effects of anger on restitution. We discuss how perceivers consider mental states such as awareness, desire, and knowledge when reasoning about blame and punishment for unintended harms, and the role of anger in this process.     

Perceptions of the Onset Controllability of AIDS and Helping Judgments: An Attributional Analysis1

Weiner's attributional model of helping behavior is used to examine the relationship between the perceived controllability of the onset of AIDS, the affective reactions of pity and anger, and helping judgments. In this model, the effect of the perceived controllability of another person's need on helping is mediated by pity and anger. In the present study, respondents read one of five scenarios describing a friend who had just been diagnosed with AIDS. The cause of the disease was manipulated in the scenarios. Knowledge about HIV transmission measures and respondent's gender were added as control variables to the original model, which was tested by using path analysis. The findings partially support Weiner's model. The effect of the perceived onset controllability of AIDS on helping judgments was mediated by pity, but not by anger. Respondents' anger toward a friend with AIDS did not inhibit help-giving.     

Anger and perception of unfairness and harm: Cultural differences in normative processes that justify sanction assignment

Drawing on moral foundation theory, the author found that in response to an infringement of intellectual property rights, both US and Chinese samples reported anger and evaluated the infringement negatively. The results also highlight the importance of considering cultural factors in moral decision‐making. Apparently, in Chinese culture, moral decisions tend to be norm‐based, even when people are assigning sanction to a transgression of the ethics of autonomy. In contrast, in American culture, moral decisions tend to be preference‐based. Furthermore, although people tend to express their anger through punishment and contempt and disgust with social exclusion, in the American context, due to its relatively high mobility, to express their moral anger, individuals prefer to sanction wrongdoing by socially isolating the wrongdoer.     

Hard to decide? The effect of imagery perspective and construal level on decision difficulty

This research designed three experiments to investigate the mechanism of how imagery perspective influences decision difficulty, which increases consumers' willingness to postpone making choices based on the construal level. Studies 1, 2, and 3 demonstrated that imagining from the actor's perspective lowers one's construal level, and thus leads to greater decision difficulty and willingness to postpone making choices. In comparison, those taking the observer perspective represent things at higher construal levels and have less difficulty making decisions or willingness to postpone making choices. Moreover, the derived results showed the need for cognition to moderate the relationship between imagery perspective and construal level. The findings herein extended the physical buying situation to online consumption, providing implications for marketers to further explore consumer behavior.     

Group reactions to dishonesty

Groups and individuals were compared for their willingness to incur financial costs in order to punish dishonest behavior by others. Study 1 demonstrated that dishonesty was punished more often by groups than by individuals and that groups’ higher willingness to punish dishonesty was mediated by stronger negative affect. Study 2 provided evidence that the increase in negative affect in groups was driven by exposure to other group members’ negative feelings and opinions during group discussions. Overall, the results suggest that being part of a group increases negative emotions toward dishonest others and leads to a greater willingness to engage in costly punishment.     

Nameless + harmless = blameless: When seemingly irrelevant factors influence judgment of (un)ethical behavior

People often make judgments about the ethicality of others’ behaviors and then decide how harshly to punish such behaviors. When they make these judgments and decisions, sometimes the victims of the unethical behavior are identifiable, and sometimes they are not. In addition, in our uncertain world, sometimes an unethical action causes harm, and sometimes it does not. We argue that a rational assessment of ethicality should not depend on the identifiability of the victim of wrongdoing or the actual harm caused if the judge and the decision maker have the same information. Yet in five laboratory studies, we show that these factors have a systematic effect on how people judge the ethicality of the perpetrator of an unethical action. Our studies show that people judge behavior as more unethical when: (1) identifiable vs. unidentifiable victims are involved and (2) the behavior leads to a negative rather than a positive outcome. We also find that people’s willingness to punish wrongdoers is consistent with their judgments, and we offer preliminary evidence on how to reduce these biases.     

The relativity of time perception produced by facial emotion stimuli

Insults elicit intense emotion. This study tests the hypothesis that one's social image, which is especially salient in honour cultures, influences the way in which one reacts to an insult. Seventy-seven honour-oriented and 72 non-honour oriented participants answered questions about a recent insult episode. Participants experienced both anger and shame in reaction to the insult. However, these emotions resulted in different behaviours. Anger led to verbal attack (i.e., criticising, insulting in return) among all participants. This relationship was explained by participants’ motivation to punish the wrongdoer. Shame, on the other hand, was moderated by honour. Shame led to verbal disapproval of the wrongdoers behaviour, but only among the honour-oriented participants. This relationship was explained by these participants’ motivation to protect their social image. By contrast, shame led to withdrawal among non-honour-oriented participants.     

Third-party punishment: altruistic and anti-social behaviours in in-group and out-group settings

This study aims at exploring the decision-making process involved in third-party punishment (TPP) within an economic frame, using the TPP game. We investigated altruistic punishment, that is, the behaviour of spending one's own money, with no personal gain, to punish those who violate the norms of cooperation. We analysed this behaviour, in an in-group and out-group game setting, to compare how individuals behave with members of their own group (in-group) and with members of another group (out-group). In particular, groups were defined on a real nationality basis (Chinese or Italian). Our results showed altruistic punishment behaviour in both experimental groups and this tendency emerged as more prominent when faced with unfair play towards a member of one's own group. Furthermore, both groups exhibited a propensity for anti-social punishment behaviour: many participants spent small amounts of money to punish fair behaviour, regardless of national group membership.     

Do Guyanese mothers' levels of warmth moderate the association between harshness and justness of physical punishment and preschoolers' prosocial behaviours and anger?

This study assessed the moderating role of Indo‐Guyanese mothers' warmth and affection on the associations between harshness and justness of physical punishment and prosocial behaviours and anger in preschoolers. One hundred and thirty‐nine rural Indo‐Guyanese mothers filled out Rohner's Parental Acceptance–Rejection (PARQ) and Physical Punishment Questionnaires (PPQ). Teachers provided assessments of children's prosocial behaviours and anger in preschool settings. Maternal warmth did not moderate the relationship between harshness of physical punishment and children's prosocial behaviours and anger, but it did moderate the relationship between justness of physical punishment and prosocial behaviours for sons as well as the association between justness of physical punishment and anger for daughters. In Caribbean societies where harsh punishment is normative, maternal warmth may work more effectively with justness, and not with harshness of physical punishment, to lower negative childhood behavioural outcomes.     

What stops revenge taking? Effects of observed emotional reactions on revenge seeking

What reaction stops revenge taking? Four experiments (total N = 191) examined this question where the victim of an interpersonal transgression could observe the offender's reaction (anger, sadness, pain, or calm) to a retributive noise punishment. We compared the punishment intensity selected by the participant before and after seeing the offender's reaction. Seeing the opponent in pain reduced subsequent punishment most strongly, while displays of sadness and verbal indications of suffering had no appeasing effect. Expression of anger about a retributive punishment did not increase revenge seeking relative to a calm reaction, even when the anger response was disambiguated as being angry with the punisher. It is concluded that the expression of pain is the most effective emotional display for the reduction of retaliatory aggression. The findings are discussed in light of recent research on reactive aggression and retributive justice.     

The spiral of distrust: (Non‐)cooperation in a repeated trust game is predicted by anger and individual differences in negative reciprocity orientation

This study investigated state anger and individual differences in negative reciprocity orientation as predictors of individuals' willingness to cooperate with strangers. In order to observe real behaviour, we used a trust game that was played over six periods. In the trust game, a first player (sender) determines how much of a certain endowment she/he wants to share with a second player (trustee), who then can give something back. We varied whether participants received feedback [feedback (yes, no)] about the trustee's behavioural decision (amount sent back). Supporting our hypotheses, the results suggest that feedback compared with no feedback about the trustee's behaviour increased anger. Specifically, information about low back transfers triggered anger and non‐cooperation in return. Importantly, participants with a strong negative reciprocity orientation reported higher levels of anger and were less willing to cooperate with the trustee compared with those with low negative reciprocity orientation. Moreover, even when anger was low, individuals with a strong negative reciprocity orientation were less willing to cooperate compared with those with a low negative reciprocity orientation. Thus, negative reciprocity orientation seems to arouse a spiral of distrust. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.     

Punishing hypocrisy: The roles of hypocrisy and moral emotions in deciding culpability and punishment of criminal and civil moral transgressors

Three experiments explored how hypocrisy affects attributions of criminal guilt and the desire to punish hypocritical criminals. Study 1 established that via perceived hypocrisy, a hypocritical criminal was seen as more culpable and was punished more than a non-hypocritical criminal who committed an identical crime. Study 2 expanded on this, showing that negative moral emotions (anger and disgust) mediated the relationships between perceived hypocrisy, criminal guilt, and punishment. Study 3 replicated the emotion finding from Study 2 using new scenarios where group agents were clearly aware of the hypocrisy of their actions, yet acted anyway. Again, perceived hypocrisy worked through moral emotions to affect criminal guilt and punishment. The current studies provide empirical support for theories relating hypocrisy and moral transgressions to moral emotions, also informing the literature on the role of moral emotions in moral reasoning and legal decision making.     

Retribution and forgiveness: The healing effects of punishing for just deserts

Although punishment and forgiveness frequently are considered to be opposites, in the present paper we propose that victims who punish their offender are subsequently more likely to forgive. Notably, punishment means that victims get justice (i.e. just deserts), which facilitates forgiveness. Study 1 reveals that participants were more likely to forgive a friend's negligence after being primed with punishment than after being primed with inability to punish. In Study 2, participants were more forgiving towards a criminal offender if the offender was punished by a judge than if the offender escaped punishment, a finding that was mediated by the just deserts motive. Study 3 was in the context of actual recalled ongoing interpersonal relations and revealed that punishment predicted forgiveness indirectly via just deserts, not via victims' vengeful motivations. It is concluded that punishment facilitates forgiveness because of its capacity to restore a sense of justice. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Honor and harmed social-image. Muslims’ anger and shame about the cartoon controversy

Two studies examined anger and shame, and their associated appraisals and behavioral intentions, in response to harm to an in-group's social-image. In Study 1, 37 British Muslims (18 men, 19 women) reported incidents in which they were devalued as Muslims. In Study 2, 108 British Muslims (57 females, 50 males, 1 undisclosed) were presented with objective evidence of their in-group's devaluation: the controversial cartoons about Prophet Muhammad The appraisal of harm to social-image predicted anger and shame (Studies 1 and 2), whereas the appraisal of offense only predicted anger (Study 2). Anger was a more empowering response than shame, as anger predicted willingness for public confrontation (Studies 1 & 2), institutional punishment (Study 2), and written disapproval (Study 2). In contrast, shame only predicted written disapproval (Study 2). Furthermore, independent of individual differences in identification as Muslim, a mediation model showed that individual differences in honor orientation predicted anger and shame via the appraisals (Study 2). Implications for theory and research are discussed.     

Justice motive effects in ageism: The effects of a victim's age on observer perceptions of injustice and punishment judgments

Drawing on just-world theory and research showing that older persons are generally assigned a devalued status in society, we examined the impact of an innocent victim's age on observer perceptions of injustice and punishment reactions. In three experiments, we demonstrated that observers perceived the suffering of an older (vs. younger) person as less unfair, which, in turn, reduced their willingness to punish the harm doer. In Study 1, participants rated a car accident as less unfair and consequently punished the harm doer less when the victim was older. In Study 2, participants recommended punishing a harm doer less when the victim was older (vs. younger) when the need to believe in a just world was threatened (i.e., only when the victim was innocent). In Study 3, only participants higher in ageism perceived the suffering of an older (vs. younger) victim as less unfair and, consequently, recommended less punishment for the harm doer.     

Future time perspective drives younger and older adults to continue investing in failing activities

Inspired by socioemotional selectivity theory, we investigated age differences in further investment in failing situations by considering goal type and future time perspective. In Experiment 1, 32 younger and 30 older adults reported their likelihood of continued investing following an unsuccessful investment. Older adults were more willing to invest with emotional goals as opposed to knowledge and unspecified goals, while younger adults showed a greater willingness to invest with emotional and knowledge goals rather than unspecified goals. In Experiment 2, another sample of 32 younger and 34 older adults completed the same decision tasks as those in Experiment 1. After future time perspective restriction, the younger adults made decisions resembling Experiment 1's older adults, while after future time perspective expansion, the older adults behaved like Experiment 1's younger adults. These results indicate that future time perspective modification could reverse participants' goal prioritisation, manifesting in differential willingness to pursue further investment in decision scenarios with different goals. Our results represent important steps towards understanding the mechanism of older and younger adults' further investment in failing situations and illustrate that forging connections between the lifespan theory of motivation and further investment decision is critical for understanding adults' decision behaviours.     

自我损耗对利他惩罚的影响:愤怒与公正敏感性的作用

采用2个行为实验探讨了自我损耗对利他惩罚的影响。实验1采用“Stroop”任务操纵被试的自我损耗，并考察愤怒情绪在其中的中介作用；实验2使用公正敏感性量表选出高低两组被试后采用“划e”任务操纵被试的自我损耗。两个实验均用最后通牒博弈考察被试的利他惩罚行为。结果发现：高损耗组被试对不公平分配方案的拒绝比例显著高于低损耗组；愤怒情绪在两者间起部分中介作用；高公正敏感组中出现了明显了自我损耗促进效应，低公正敏感组不存在。证实了自我损耗对利他惩罚促进作用。