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 experimental 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 punishment 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.

The effects of empathy, perceived injustice and group identity on altruistic preferences: Towards compensation or punishment

“…This assertion is supported by Gummerum et al () who found that participants were more willing to compensate the victim when manipulated to experience the victims' feelings from the victim’s perspective. Van Doorn and Brouwers () posit that participants choose to compensate the victim for various reasons such as in order to gain the victims respect or because they care about the victim as an ingroup member. Further support for this argument comes from neuroimaging studies that demonstrate individuals hold attentional bias towards ingroup members when perceiving injustice (Liu et al, ).…”

Third-party responses to injustice: a review on the preference for compensation

“…Still, such helping need not be limited to close ones. Van Doorn et al (2018aDoorn et al ( , 2018b and Van de Vyver and Abrams (2015), as discussed previously, have shown that people also preferred compensation to punishment in cases of unacquainted victims of injustice.…”

“…Previous findings indicate that people were willing to spend more game money on compensation than punishment (e.g. Chavez & Bicchieri, 2013;Lotz et al, 2011;Van de Vyver & Abrams, 2015;Van Doorn et al, 2018a, 2018b. However, in more real-life scenarios (tax dodging or robbery), as used in studies by Van de Vyver and Abrams (2015) and Van Prooijen (2010), this preference was not found.…”

“…Also in the so-called one-shot economic games, in which players play a single game in which they have the opportunity to compensate or punish, this preference exists (e.g. Lotz et al, 2011;Van Doorn et al, 2018a, 2018b.…”

“…It seems that injustice in itself (albeit via the experience of anger) can lead to a preference for compensation over punishment (e.g. Lotz et al, 2011;Van Doorn et al, 2018a, 2018b.…”