The effect of feedback on support for a sanctioning system in a social dilemma: The difference between installing and maintaining the sanction

Abstract

When do people support sanctioning systems in social dilemmas? Sanctions increase collective efficiency, but have the disadvantage of restricting peopleÕs autonomy. This paper studies the effects of feedback about collective (in)efficiency and the influence of the presence or absence of a sanctioning system. The results show that, except after feedback about collective inefficiency, people were reluctant to support installation of a sanctioning system. When a sanctioning system was already present, however, sanction support was strong and not affected by feedback. Interestingly, the presence of a sanctioning system increased pessimism about attaining collective efficiency. This suggests that the mere presence of a sanctioning system creates the need to have that sanctioning system, and that installing one can have irreversible consequences.

When sanctions convey moral norms

“…After all, when a sanction can communicate moral disapproval, as the current paper suggests, this comes down to communicating what one ought to do. On the other hand, sanctions may inadvertently contribute to a descriptive norm in favor of the prohibited behavior (Cialdini 1996;Mulder et al 2005). For example, if a sanctioning system is installed that it is forbidden to smoke in public places, people may infer that smoking in public places is existing behavior in need of discouragement.…”

Free Markets and Fettered Consumers

“…Asynchronous reciprocity, however, requires reputation and trust. Norms for fair practice, and sanctions for bad behavior, may evolve in social networks to facilitate asynchronous reciprocity, and individuals may by habit or internalization conform to these norms even in novel situations where the normal cycle of approval and reputation is suspended (see Fehr and Klaus M. Schmidt, 1999;Laetitia B. Mulder et al, 2005). Consider the single-shot ultimatum game with anonymous players.…”

Support Policies and Collective Efficiency in a Furniture Cluster

“…The cluster per se is a way to improve collective efficiency by the interrelationship of the many companies that form the cluster, enabling these companies to obtain positive results, improving competitiveness [19] to ensure the market or to reduce the competition [20]. Cooperation between these companies is important to lead to collective efficiency [21].…”