Cited by 451Experimental Behavioral Economics StudiesEvolutionary Game Theory and CooperationGame Theory and Applications

Driving forces behind informal sanctions

Falk, Armin, Fehr, Ernst, Fischbacher, Urs·2005·Econometrica

Abstract

This paper investigates the driving forces behind informal sanctions in cooperation games and the extent to which theories of fairness and reciprocity capture these forces. We find that cooperators' punishment is almost exclusively targeted toward the defectors, but the latter also impose a considerable amount of spiteful punishment on the cooperators. However, spiteful punishment vanishes if the punishers can no longer affect the payoff differences between themselves and the punished individual, whereas the cooperators even increase the resources devoted to punishment in this case. Our data also discriminate between different fairness principles. Fairness theories that are based on the assumption that players compare their own payoff to the group's average or the group's total payoff cannot explain the fact that cooperators target their punishment at the defectors. Fairness theories that assume that players aim to minimize payoff inequalities cannot explain the fact that cooperators punish defectors even if payoff inequalities cannot be reduced. Therefore, retaliation, i.e., the desire to harm those who committed unfair acts, seems to be the most important motive behind fairness-driven informal sanctions. Copyright The Econometric Society 2005.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00644.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cooperation levels are significantly higher when punishment of free-riders is possible compared to when it is not.

    “Our results suggest that, while cooperation levels are significantly higher when punishment of free-riders is possible compared to when it is not—a result that has been established multiple times in the literature (Fehr and Gächter, 2000, 2002; Falk et al., 2005; Chaudhuri, 2011)—OT also shows a positive effect on cooperation, irrespective of the availability of a sanctioning mechanism.”

    From Oxytocin promotes altruistic punishment (2017) · cites this paper as Falk et al., 2005

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Falk, A., Fehr, E., & Fischbacher, U.
Affiliations
University of Bonn (DE)
Corresponding author
Falk, Armin
Venue
Econometrica
Published
2005-11
Volume
73
Issue
6
Pages
2017-2030
ISSN
  • 0012-9682 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-0262
OpenAlex
W3122702071
Cited by
451
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 32
FWCI
51.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Econometrica (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Evolutionary Game Theory and Cooperation
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Game Theory and Applications
Keywords
informal sanctions, retaliation, fairness, reciprocity, cooperation games, payoff inequality, principle of fairness, social norms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review