When is it appropriate to reprimand a norm violation? The roles of anger, behavioral consequences, violation severity, and social distance
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2017, Vol 12, Issue 4
Abstract
Experiments on economic games typically fail to find positive reputational effects of using peer punishment of selfish behavior in social dilemmas. Theorists had expected positive reputational effects because of the potentially beneficial consequences that punishment may have on norm violators’ behavior. Going beyond the game-theoretic paradigm, we used vignettes to study how various social factors influence approval ratings of a peer who reprimands a violator of a group-beneficial norm. We found that ratings declined when punishers showed anger, and this effect was mediated by perceived aggressiveness. Thus the same emotions that motivate peer punishers may make them come across as aggressive, to the detriment of their reputation. However, the negative effect of showing anger disappeared when the norm violation was sufficiently severe. Ratings of punishers were also influenced by social distance, such that it is less appropriate for a stranger than a friend to reprimand a violator. In sum, peer punisher ratings were very high for a friend reprimanding a severe norm violation, but particularly poor for a stranger showing anger at a mild norm violation. We found no effect on ratings of whether the reprimand had the beneficial consequence of changing the violator’s behavior. Our findings provide insight into how peer punishers can avoid negative reputational effects. They also point to the importance of going beyond economic games when studying peer punishment.
Authors and Affiliations
Kimmo Eriksson, Per A. Andersson and Pontus Strimling
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678302
- DOI -
- Views 125
- Downloads 0
Speakers’ choice of frame in binary choice: Effects of recommendation mode and option attractiveness
A distinction is proposed between recommending for preferred choice options and recommending against non-preferred choice options. In binary choice, both recommendation modes are logically, though not psychologically, eq...
Others’ opinions count, but not all of them: anchoring to ingroup versus outgroup members’ behavior in charitable giving
Because of the large amount of information and the difficulty in selecting an appropriate recipient in the context of charitable giving, people tend to make extensive use of heuristics, which sometimes leads them to wron...
Counterfactual thinking and regulatory fit
According to regulatory fit theory (Higgins, 2000), when people make decisions with strategies that sustain their regulatory focus orientation, they ``feel right'' about what they are doing, and this ``feeling-right'' ex...
The benefits of global scaling in multi-criteria decision analysis
When there are multiple competing objectives in a decision-making process, Multi-Attribute Choice scoring models are excellent tools, permitting the incorporation of both subjective and objective attributes. However, the...
Action orientation, consistency and feelings of regret
Previous research has demonstrated that consistency between people's behavior and their dispositions has predictive validity for judgments of regret. Research has also shown that differences in the personality variable o...