An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment: six experimental demonstrations

Janne van Doorn; Marcel Zeelenberg; Seger M. Breugelmans

doi:10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9

An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment: six experimental demonstrations

Janne van Doorn^*, Marcel Zeelenberg, Seger M. Breugelmans

^*Corresponding author for this work

Marketing

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

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.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	333-351
Number of pages	19
Journal	Theory and Decision
Volume	85
Issue number	3/4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9
Publication status	Published - Oct 2018

Keywords

Compensation
Equity
Injustice
Preference
Punishment
Third party

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9

Cite this

@article{fc847821c32a4ef7bfdf31e6e5794f0e,

title = "An exploration of third parties{\textquoteright} 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.",

keywords = "Compensation, Equity, Injustice, Preference, Punishment, Third party",

author = "{van Doorn}, Janne and Marcel Zeelenberg and Breugelmans, {Seger M.}",

year = "2018",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9",

language = "English",

volume = "85",

pages = "333--351",

journal = "Theory and Decision",

issn = "0040-5833",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "3/4",

}

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 M.

PY - 2018/10

Y1 - 2018/10

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 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.

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 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.

KW - Compensation

KW - Equity

KW - Injustice

KW - Preference

KW - Punishment

KW - Third party

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054192089&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054192089&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9

DO - 10.1007/s11238-018-9665-9

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85054192089

VL - 85

SP - 333

EP - 351

JO - Theory and Decision

JF - Theory and Decision

SN - 0040-5833

IS - 3/4

ER -

An exploration of third parties’ preference for compensation over punishment: six experimental demonstrations

Abstract

Keywords

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this