Introduction to Third Party Punishment

Participants were more willing to execute third-party punishment under the harm frame compared to the help frame, manifesting as a framing effect.

This paper shows in an experimental setting that this behavioral finding extends to a situation where a pair of individuals jointly decides how strong a third-party punishment to impose.

Although third-party punishment helps sustain group cooperation, might victim compensation provide third parties with superior reputational benefits? Across 24 studies (N = 21,296), we provide a comprehensive examination of the consequences of the choice between punishment and compensation.

Here, we review recent work that illustrates how a (direct and indirect) reciprocity framework can illuminate our understanding of several factors related to prosocial behavior - namely group membership, gossip, and third-party punishment.

Third-party punishment can promote fair behavior.

Furthermore, the influence of gain and loss contexts and social status on third-party punishment and compensation were independent of each other.

Study 1 ( N  = 544) shows that people do not discriminate between genders when they have the option to punish (reward) defectors (cooperators) in a one-shot prisoner’s dilemma with third-party punishment/reward.

We used ego-resiliency (ER) and Machiavellian (Mach) questionnaires to measure resilience and flexibility, and applied third-party punishment (TPP) and ultimatum game (UG), as well as moral dilemma (MD) tasks to derive VSC-associated brain activity using 3T-functional magnetic resonance imaging.

In the context of corporate environmental investment (EI), this paper designs an experiment on public goods game without punishment and an experiment on that game with third-party punishment (TPP).

, third-party punishment) is a crucial factor in the functioning of human societies.

For over a decade, neuroimaging and brain stimulation studies have investigated neural mechanisms of third-party punishment, a key instrument for social norms enforcement.

, third-party punishment, TPP).

The willingness of humans to engage in third-party punishment (TPP)-a lynchpin of our society-critically depends on the interaction between the wrongdoer's intent and the harm that he caused.

We also analyze knowledge sharing by introducing an evolutionary game model and conducting simulations, and reveal the following: (1) the appropriate choice for an organization that is increasing its knowledge contribution is third-party punishment; (2) the status conflict advantage and disadvantage play important roles in knowledge sharing.

Third-party punishment (TPP) plays an important role in fairness norm enforcement.

These results contribute to the debate on the function of third-party punishment in humans, suggesting that retributive motives towards selfish transgressors are privileged during ontogeny.

Second-party punishment (SPP) and third-party punishment (TPP) are two basic forms of costly punishment that play an essential role in maintaining social orders.

Third-party punishment can promote fair behavior.

This novel study of teenagers globally was conducted using three classic behavioral economics experiments (the Dictator Game, Ultimatum Game, and Third-Party Punishment Game) translated into an electronic survey including demographic questions.

In a unified experimental framework, we examine which of three fundamental pillars of human cooperation – direct and indirect reciprocity as well as third-party punishment – emerges earliest as an effective means to increase cooperation in a repeated prisoner’s dilemma game.

Third-party punishment refers to a behavioral phenomenon whereby people punish wrongdoers even if their sanction incurs personal costs but yields no direct benefits.

Third-party punishment refers to the punishment imposed by a party whose benefit is not directly affected by any norm violations.

In addition, right anodal stimulation significantly decreased the participant’s third-party punishment (TPP) imposed by the cooperators toward the defectors.

This behavior is referred to as third-party punishment.

We investigated third-party punishment and compensation within the context of unfairly shared losses and gains in a dictator game under time pressure.

Third-party punishment is a common mechanism to promote cooperation in humans.

Humans' evolutionary success has depended in part on their willingness to punish, at personal cost, bad actors who have not harmed them directly-a behavior known as costly third-party punishment.

Our results illustrate the importance of considering different types of punishment in assessing the development of third-party punishment, and raise questions about the development of corporal third-party punishment.

Anthropological and psychological research on direct third-party punishment suggests that adults expect the leaders of social groups to intervene in within-group transgressions.

In the dictator game with third-party punishment, participants made offers to a receiver while being observed by a punisher, or could themselves punish unfair offers.

Humans’ evolutionary success has depended in part on their willingness to punish, at personal cost, bad actors who have not harmed them directly—a behavior known as costly third-party punishment.

ABSTRACT Third-party punishment occurs when a perpetrator of a transgression is punished by another person who was not directly affected by the transgression (i.

Prosocial third-party punishment (3PP) is a punitive behavior against antisocial individuals, which might explain extended cooperativeness in humans.

At the end of the stimulation, participants played a third-party punishment game, consisting in viewing a series of fair or unfair monetary allocations between unknown proposers and recipients.

In a series of three studies using a third-party punishment and compensation (3PPC) game we show (Study One), that romantically-primed undergraduate males, express a preference to either ‘compensate’ or ‘both compensate and punish’, and undergraduate women find males who ‘compensate’ or ‘compensate and punish’ the most attractive (Studies Two and Three).

, third-party punishment) is critical for stable, cooperative societies.

Third-party punishment (TPP) is a substantial and special kind of altruistic behaviors, which could help maintain social norms and human cooperation.

ABSTRACT Third-party punishment is a form of peer-to-peer sanctioning that is influenced by descriptive norms.

In the dictator game with third-party punishment, participants made offers to a receiver while being observed by a punisher, or could themselves punish unfair offers.

Such third-party punishment (TPP) often takes an indirect form, such as the withholding of help.

The majority of the studies (61%) employed the widely used neuroeconomic paradigms, such as fairness-related norm tasks (Ultimatum Game, third-party punishment game), while the remaining tasks reported criminal scenarios evaluation and social rejection tasks.

, third-party punishment).