Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Mechanisms to Detect and Punish Cheaters

  • Stefan PfattheicherEmail author
  • Robert Böhm
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_935-1

Synonyms

Definition

Cheating violates shared social contracts. Individuals are sensitive to such violations and punish transgressors.

Introduction

Cheating can be broadly defined as any action that violates a social contract (e.g., a shared social norm) and that is intended to obtain personal benefits while inflicting costs on other individuals who have not agreed upon these costs (Cosmides 1989). Cheating occurs in many different contexts – in intimate relationships or in social groups where mutual cooperation increases collective benefits, while cheating benefits only the defector. Consider, for instance, a dyadic interaction in which someone pretends to behave cooperatively, leading another to behave cooperatively as well to maximize collective benefits. In this situation, the first person can exploit the cooperative other by defecting, thus benefiting oneself but inflicting costs on the cooperator. In this regard,...

Keywords

Social Contract Source Memory Cheat Behavior Mutual Cooperation Drinking Beer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Balliet, D., Mulder, L. B., & van Lange, P. A. (2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 594–615.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyd, R., Gintis, H., Bowles, S., & Richerson, P. J. (2003). The evolution of altruistic punishment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 3531–3535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buchner, A., Bell, R., Mehl, B., & Musch, J. (2009). No enhanced recognition memory, but better source memory for faces of cheaters. Evolution and Human Behavior, 30(3), 212–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cosmides, L. (1989). The logic of social exchange: Has natural selection shaped how humans reason? Studies with the Wason selection task. Cognition, 31, 187–276.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. H. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.), The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture (pp. 163–228). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hechler, S., Neyer, F. J., & Kessler, T. (2016). The infamous among us: Enhanced reputational memory for uncooperative ingroup members. Cognition, 157, 1–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Pfattheicher, S., & Keller, J. (2013). Vigilant self-regulation and costly punishment in public goods situations. European Journal of Personality, 27, 346–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Srivastava, J., Espinoza, F., & Fedorikhin, A. (2009). Coupling and decoupling of unfairness and anger in ultimatum bargaining. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22, 475–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Trivers, R. L. (1971). The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology, 46, 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social PsychologyUlm UniversityUlmGermany
  2. 2.School of Business and EconomicsRWTH Aachen UniversityAachenGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Melissa McDonald
    • 1
  1. 1.Oakland UniversityRochesterUSA