An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment

Six experimental demonstrations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

5 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Research suggests that to restore equity, third parties prefer compensation of a victim over the punishment of a perpetrator. It remains unclear, however, whether this preference for compensation is stable or specific to certain situations. In six exper- imental studies, we find that adjustments in the characteristics of the situation or in the available behavioral options hardly modify the preference of compensation over punishment. This preference for compensation was found even in cases where pun- ishment might refrain a perpetrator from acting unfairly again in the future, and even when punishment has a greater impact in restoring equity than compensation does. Thus, the preference of compensation over punishment appears to be quite robust. Implications and ideas for future research are discussed.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)333-351
JournalTheory and Decision
Volume85
Issue number3/4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Fingerprint

party preference
penalty
Demonstrations
equity
Compensation and Redress
Punishment

Keywords

  • Third party
  • Preference
  • Compensation
  • Punishment
  • Equity
  • Injustice
  • PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE
  • ALTRUISTIC PUNISHMENT
  • 3RD-PARTY PUNISHMENT
  • JUSTICE SENSITIVITY
  • SOCIAL PREFERENCES
  • COSTLY PUNISHMENT
  • MECHANICAL TURK
  • MORAL EMOTIONS
  • FAIRNESS
  • BEHAVIOR

Cite this

@article{a0ed3a8fff7741a2a2f17d64bfee70be,
title = "An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment: Six experimental demonstrations",
abstract = "Research suggests that to restore equity, third parties prefer compensation of a victim over the punishment of a perpetrator. It remains unclear, however, whether this preference for compensation is stable or specific to certain situations. In six exper- imental studies, we find that adjustments in the characteristics of the situation or in the available behavioral options hardly modify the preference of compensation over punishment. This preference for compensation was found even in cases where pun- ishment might refrain a perpetrator from acting unfairly again in the future, and even when punishment has a greater impact in restoring equity than compensation does. Thus, the preference of compensation over punishment appears to be quite robust. Implications and ideas for future research are discussed.",
keywords = "Third party, Preference, Compensation, Punishment, Equity, Injustice, PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE, ALTRUISTIC PUNISHMENT, 3RD-PARTY PUNISHMENT, JUSTICE SENSITIVITY, SOCIAL PREFERENCES, COSTLY PUNISHMENT, MECHANICAL TURK, MORAL EMOTIONS, FAIRNESS, BEHAVIOR",
author = "{Van Doorn}, Janne and Marcel Zeelenberg and Seger Breugelmans",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9",
language = "English",
volume = "85",
pages = "333--351",
journal = "Theory and Decision",
issn = "0040-5833",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "3/4",

}

An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment : Six experimental demonstrations. / Van Doorn, Janne; Zeelenberg, Marcel; Breugelmans, Seger.

In: Theory and Decision, Vol. 85, No. 3/4, 2018, p. 333-351.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment

T2 - Six experimental demonstrations

AU - Van Doorn, Janne

AU - Zeelenberg, Marcel

AU - Breugelmans, Seger

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Research suggests that to restore equity, third parties prefer compensation of a victim over the punishment of a perpetrator. It remains unclear, however, whether this preference for compensation is stable or specific to certain situations. In six exper- imental studies, we find that adjustments in the characteristics of the situation or in the available behavioral options hardly modify the preference of compensation over punishment. This preference for compensation was found even in cases where pun- ishment might refrain a perpetrator from acting unfairly again in the future, and even when punishment has a greater impact in restoring equity than compensation does. Thus, the preference of compensation over punishment appears to be quite robust. Implications and ideas for future research are discussed.

AB - Research suggests that to restore equity, third parties prefer compensation of a victim over the punishment of a perpetrator. It remains unclear, however, whether this preference for compensation is stable or specific to certain situations. In six exper- imental studies, we find that adjustments in the characteristics of the situation or in the available behavioral options hardly modify the preference of compensation over punishment. This preference for compensation was found even in cases where pun- ishment might refrain a perpetrator from acting unfairly again in the future, and even when punishment has a greater impact in restoring equity than compensation does. Thus, the preference of compensation over punishment appears to be quite robust. Implications and ideas for future research are discussed.

KW - Third party

KW - Preference

KW - Compensation

KW - Punishment

KW - Equity

KW - Injustice

KW - PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE

KW - ALTRUISTIC PUNISHMENT

KW - 3RD-PARTY PUNISHMENT

KW - JUSTICE SENSITIVITY

KW - SOCIAL PREFERENCES

KW - COSTLY PUNISHMENT

KW - MECHANICAL TURK

KW - MORAL EMOTIONS

KW - FAIRNESS

KW - BEHAVIOR

U2 - 10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9

DO - 10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9

M3 - Article

VL - 85

SP - 333

EP - 351

JO - Theory and Decision

JF - Theory and Decision

SN - 0040-5833

IS - 3/4

ER -