Experimental Economics

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 741–763 | Cite as

The effects of endowment size and strategy method on third party punishment

Original Paper

Abstract

Numerous experiments have shown that people often engage in third-party punishment (3PP) of selfish behavior. This evidence has been used to argue that people respond to selfishness with anger, and get utility from punishing those who mistreat others. Elements of the standard 3PP experimental design, however, allow alternative explanations: it has been argued that 3PP could be motivated by envy (as selfish dictators earn high payoffs), or could be influenced by the use of the strategy method (which is known to influence second-party punishment). Here we test these alternatives by varying the third party’s endowment and the use of the strategy method, and measuring punishment. We find that while third parties do report more envy when they have lower endowments, neither manipulation significantly affects punishment. We also show that punishment is associated with ratings of anger but not of envy. Thus, our results suggest that 3PP is not an artifact of self-focused envy or use of the strategy method. Instead, our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that 3PP is motivated by anger.

Keywords

Cooperation Norm-enforcement Strategy method Emotions Fairness Economic games 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Gordon Kraft-Todd for assistance running the experiments, and gratefully acknowledge funding from the John Templeton Foundation.

Supplementary material

10683_2015_9466_MOESM1_ESM.docx (541 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 541 kb)

References

  1. Almenberg, J., Dreber, A., Apicella, C., & Rand, D. (2010). Third party reward and punishment: group size, efficiency and public goods. In PSYCHOLOGY OF PUNISHMENT. Nova Publishing, Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  2. Amir, O., Rand, D., & Gal, Y. K. (2012). Economic games on the internet: The effect of $1 stakes. PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031461.Google Scholar
  3. Balafoutas, L., Grechenig, K., & Nikiforakis, N. (2014). Third-party punishment and counter-punishment in one-shot interactions. Economics Letters, 122(2), 308–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balafoutas, L., & Nikiforakis, N. (2012). Norm enforcement in the city: A natural field experiment. European Economic Review, 56(8), 1773–1785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernhard, H., Fischbacher, U., & Fehr, E. (2006). Parochial altruism in humans. Nature, 442(7105), 912–915. doi: 10.1038/nature04981.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bosman, R., & Van Winden, F. (2002). Emotional hazard in a power-to-take experiment. The Economic Journal, 112(476), 147–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brandts, J., & Charness, G. (2011). The strategy versus the direct-response method: A first survey of experimental comparisons. Experimental Economics, 14(3), 375–398. doi: 10.1007/s10683-011-9272-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruene, M., Scheele, D., Heinisch, C., Tas, C., Wischniewski, J., & Guentuerkuen, O. (2012). Empathy moderates the effect of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on costly punishment. PLoS One. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0044747.Google Scholar
  9. Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. H. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital labor production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19, 7–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Charness, G., Cobo-Reyes, R., & Jimenez, N. (2008). An investment game with third-party intervention. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 68(1), 18–28. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2008.02.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crockett, M., Apergis-Schoute, A., Herrmann, B., Lieberman, M., Mueller, U., Robbins, T. W., et al. (2013). Serotonin modulates striatal responses to fairness and retaliation in humans. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(8), 3505–3513. doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.2761-12.2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cubitt, R. P., Drouvelis, M., & Gächter, S. (2011). Framing and free riding: Emotional responses and punishment in social dilemma games. Experimental Economics, 14(2), 254–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Falk, A., Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2005). Driving forces behind informal sanctions. Econometrica, 73(6), 2017–2030. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00644.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U. (2004). Third-party punishment and social norms. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(2), 63–87. doi: 10.1016/s1090-5138(04)00005-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fehr, E., & Gachter, S. (2002). Altruistic punishment in humans. Nature, 415(6868), 137–140. doi: 10.1038/415137a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fehr, E., & Schmidt, K. M. (1999). A theory of fairness, competition, and cooperation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(3), 817–868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fischbacher, U., Gächter, S., & Quercia, S. (2012). The behavioral validity of the strategy method in public good experiments. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(4), 897–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gilbert, D. T., & Wilson, T. D. (2007). Prospection: Experiencing the future. Science, 317(5843), 1351–1354. doi: 10.1126/science.1144161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Götte, L., Huffman, D., & Meier, S. (2006). The impact of group membership on cooperation and norm enforcement: Evidence using random assignment to real social groups. American Economic Review, 96(2), 212–216. doi: 10.1257/000282806777211658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Henrich, J., Ensminger, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., et al. (2010). Markets, religion, community size, and the evolution of fairness and punishment. Science, 327(5972), 1480–1484. doi: 10.1126/science.1182238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Henrich, J., McElreath, R., Barr, A., Ensminger, J., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., et al. (2006). Costly punishment across human societies. Science, 312(5781), 1767–1770. doi: 10.1126/science.1127333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Horton, J. J., Rand, D., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (2011). The online laboratory: Conducting experiments in a real labor market. Experimental Economics, 14(3), 399–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jordan, J. J., McAuliffe, K., & Warneken, F. (2014). Development of in-group favoritism in children’s third-party punishment of selfishness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(35), 12710–12715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kurzban, R., DeScioli, P., & O’Brien, E. (2007). Audience effects on moralistic punishment. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(2), 75–84. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.06.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levine, D. K. (1998). Modeling altruism and spitefulness in experiments. Review of Economic Dynamics, 1(3), 593–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Marlowe, F. W., Berbesque, J. C., Barr, A., Barrett, C., Bolyanatz, A., Cardenas, J. C., et al. (2008). More ‘altruistic’ punishment in larger societies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 275(1634), 587–590. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2007.1517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McAuliffe, K., Jordan, J. J., & Warneken, F. (2015). Costly third-party punishment in young children. Cognition, 134, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nelissen, R. M. A., & Zeelenberg, M. (2009). Moral emotions as determinants of third-party punishment: Anger, guilt, and the functions of altruistic sanctions. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(7), 543–553.Google Scholar
  31. Nikiforakis, N., & Mitchell, H. (2013). Mixing the carrots with the sticks: third party punishment and reward. Experimental Economics, 17(1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on amazon mechanical turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(5), 411–419.Google Scholar
  33. Pedersen, E. J., Kurzban, R., & McCullough, M. E. (2013). Do humans really punish altruistically? A closer look. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 280(1758), 20122723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rand, D. (2012). The promise of Mechanical Turk: How online labor markets can help theorists run behavioral experiments. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 299, 172–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rand, D., Arbesman, S., & Christakis, N. A. (2011). Dynamic social networks promote cooperation in experiments with humans. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(48), 19193–19198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rand, D., Greene, J. D., & Nowak, M. A. (2012). Spontaneous giving and calculated greed. Nature, 489(7416), 427–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Selten, R. (1965). Die Strategiemethode zur Erforschung des eingeschränkt rationalen Verhaltens im Rahmen eines Oligopolexperimentes. In Seminar für Mathemat. Wirtschaftsforschung u. Ökonometrie.Google Scholar
  38. Shinada, M., Yamagishi, T., & Ohmura, Y. (2004). False friends are worse than bitter enemies: “Altruistic” punishment of in-group members. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(6), 379–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Suri, S., & Watts, D. J. (2011). Cooperation and contagion in web-based, networked public goods experiments. PLoS One, 6(3), e16836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1991). Self-ratings versus peer-ratings of specific emotional traits—evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 927–940. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.60.6.927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect—the panas scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jillian Jordan
    • 1
  • Katherine McAuliffe
    • 1
    • 2
  • David Rand
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Psychology DepartmentBoston CollegeChestnut HillUSA
  3. 3.Economics DepartmentYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  4. 4.School of ManagementYale UniversityNew HavenUSA

Personalised recommendations